The Green Party has selected Henry Gent as its prospective parliamentary candidate for the new constituency of Honiton and Sidmouth.

Adam Manning www.sidmouthherald.co.uk 

The constituency also includes Ottery St Mary, Cullompton and Axminster.

Other candidates for this new constituency are sitting MPs Simon Jupp (Conservatives, East Devon) and Richard Foord (Liberal Democrats, Tiverton and Honiton).

Mr Gent has enjoyed being a member of Devon County Council since 2021, enabling him to campaign for local active travel routes and safer conditions for pedestrians across his division.

He has also been a member of Broadclyst Parish Council since 2010. Henry has run his family farm in East Devon for 40 years and is now handing on to the next generation.

Speaking on his appointment, Henry told the Herald: ”I have agreed to stand for parliament because people want the Green Party on the ballot paper, for a society fit for the transition to a low carbon sustainable future.”

Welcome to the broken shires, the legacy of 14 years of Tory austerity and cheese pairing. –  Owl

Nearly one in 10 councils in England have warned they will go bust in the next 12 months as authorities plan widespread cuts, above-inflation council tax rises and across-the-board increases to resident charges, a survey has revealed.

Patrick Butler www.theguardian.com 

The Local Government Information Unit (LGIU) annual poll of local authority leaders and top managers reveals a near-total collapse in confidence in the financial viability of councils as they grapple with “desperate” pressures and shrinking budgets.

It warns that council insolvencies – once extremely rare and triggered by unusual special factors such as the failure of commercial investments – should now be regarded as “normal occurrences” likely to hit even well run authorities.

The LGIU chief executive, Jonathan Carr-West, said: “This report, for the first time, demonstrates how widespread councils’ desperate funding situation is. That there is a structural funding issue is now impossible to deny.”

Eight English councils have declared themselves in effect bankrupt since 2018, including four in the past 15 months, including Woking, Nottingham, Birmingham and Thurrock. Several others have planned major cuts in an explicit attempt to stave off insolvency.

Earlier this month, a cross-party group of MPs said an emergency £4bn cash injection was needed to address an “out of control” financial crisis. In January, the government announced £600m in one-off emergency funding – widely regarded as an inadequate “sticking plaster” response by councils.

The survey lays bare what it calls a “dysfunctional” relationship between councils and Whitehall, with the vast majority (94%) of local authority leaders believing ministers have little understanding of the scale of the financial crisis facing councils.

Only 4% of council leaders felt confident about the sustainability of local government finance – down from 14% last year and 20% in 2020. One respondent described running the council as “a permanent state of crisis management”.

Another respondent said: “It feels the worst I’ve ever known it (even than when I started in the early 90s) with no prospect of change. Chief finance officer conferences feel more like group therapy nowadays.”

Survey findings include:

• Nine per cent of councils (14 authorities) surveyed reported they were “likely” to declare effective bankruptcy in the next 12 months, with more than half saying they would go bust in the next five years without extra funding.
• Rising need and costs in children’s services were the biggest drivers of financial instability in top-tier councils, with soaring homelessness bills the biggest risk factor for district councils.
• Nine out of 10 councils plan to raise council tax, with the same proportion proposing to introduce or raise charges for services like garden waste disposal and parking. Nearly two-thirds plan service reductions, “meaning that services are getting more expensive just as they are being cut”.

The survey is based on 160 responses from 128 councils in England (out of a total of 317) reflecting a broad cross-section of councils and geographical spread, and a mixture of political control.

A spokesperson for the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities said: “We recognise councils are facing challenges and that is why we announced an additional £600m support package for councils across England, increasing their overall funding for the upcoming financial year to £64.7bn – a 7.5% increase in cash terms.

“This includes £500m of new funding for councils with responsibility for adult and children’s social care, distributed through the social care grant. Councils are responsible for their own finances and setting council tax levels, but we have been clear they should be mindful of cost-of living pressures while controlling any unnecessary or wasteful expenditures.”

To quote an impeccable/infamous Tory source from the last century: “No!….. No!……No!” – Owl

Thames Water has been lobbying the government and regulators to let it increase bills by 40%, pay lower fines for breaches and keep paying out dividends as part of efforts to avert a taxpayer bailout, according to a report.

Jack Simpson www.theguardian.com 

The UK’s largest water company was trying to strike a deal with the watchdog Ofwat that would give it permission to charge customers more to avoid having to be taken over by court-appointed special administrators, the Financial Times reported.

That plan would give Thames Water permission to increase bills by 40% by 2030, while also offering more leniency around regulator fines and rules around the dividends it can pay to shareholders.

It comes as the company, which serves more than 15m households, attempts to deal with a debt pile of £14bn and widespread criticism over sewage dumping.

If the government or Ofwat felt that Thames Water was unable to pay its debts it could apply to the high court to invoke the special administration process, in which administrators would be brought in to help manage the company.

Last week, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) updated 30-year-old legislation on the special administration regime, which would allow existing shareholders to retain a stake in the company and make it less likely that failing water companies could be fully renationalised.

According to the FT, officials at Defra have in place contingency plans for Thames Water if it collapses, under the name Project Timber. As part of this, it hopes Ofwat would allow “regulatory easements” on the issuing of hefty fines, which would put further pressure on the company.

In December, the parent company of Thames Water, Kemble Water Holdings, was told by auditors that it could run out of cash by April if shareholders did not inject more funds into the company.

The company has raised £500m and says shareholders would inject more than £3bn more – but this would be dependent on Thames Water getting what it wants from the regulator.

A crucial part of this is getting permission to issue dividends to services its debt. However, new rules introduced by the government last year can take enforcement action against water companies issuing dividends if they are performing badly against financial and environmental targets.

Thames Water has said investors will not take any money out of the business until the turnaround is completed but the rules do not distinguish between internal and external dividends.

Thames Water revealed this month that it expected more leaks than initially thought, after its ageing pipes were overwhelmed by heavy rain this winter.

An Ofwat spokesperson said: “Ofwat does not comment on speculation. Thames Water needs to continue to deliver on its turnaround plan to improve its operational and environmental performance. It is for the company to secure shareholder backing to improve its financial resilience. We will continue to closely monitor the company’s progress as they do so to protect customers’ interests.”

A government spokesperson said: “Water companies are commercial entities and we do not comment on the financial situation of specific companies as it would not be appropriate.

“We prepare for a range of scenarios across our regulated industries – including water – as any responsible government would.”

Thames Water declined to comment.

The technical article below explains why researchers from Reading believe the Environment Agency (EA) forecasting system that tells people whether it is safe to swim in bathing waters in England is not fit for purpose.

Before getting to the summary of the research, Owl, and Owl’s correspondents, have  long had additional concerns.

There is the dubious method, described below, of how the EA justifies discarding highly polluted readings when awarding coveted star ratings to beaches.

Another concern, put to Owl by correspondents in the past but  not discussed in this article, is whether the EA sampling is conducted where bathers actually swim.

Observation suggests not.

Jo Bateman, when interviewed on “This Morning” earlier this month, said that she first started swimming in the Exe estuary “Duck Pond” until she learned the significance of the “oily slick” that often appeared on the surface of the water.

Next door in Budleigh there are two brook outlets discharging onto the beach and the river Otter carrying whatever flows into it from Honiton and Ottery St Mary across the bay. How can the whole beach be given a single rating? Like Exmouth, there must be some sections more likely to suffer pollution than others. These problems are common to all our beaches.

Now to this opaque, but important “small print”, in the Environment Agency explanation of how bathing water quality is assessed:

 “At the bathing waters where PRF [Pollution Risk Forecasting] is possible, there is an agreement with local authorities for them to display warning signs at a bathing water when a pollution risk warning is issued. If one of these warnings is seen to be in place by our samplers when taking a sample and meets relevant criteria, then the sample may be disregarded from the set which is used to make the annual classification. This is done under the ‘Short Term Pollution’ provisions of the Regulations. This provision means that the classification reflects the water quality when advice against bathing wasn’t issued, and when people are likely to be using the water.“

Owl thinks this means: bathing water quality may be “excellent 3-star” except when it isn’t!

And remember the PRF warnings only operate during the summer, yet people swim all year round. Perhaps beaches should have a summer and winter quality rating.

Sea swimmers bathing in sewage without realising due to outdated warning system

Lucie Heath inews.co.uk

Swimmers are bathing in sewage in locations that they have been wrongly told are safe because of the Goverment’s “outdated” pollution warning system, i has been told.

Researchers from the University of Reading found that the system that tells people whether it is safe to swim in bathing waters in England relies on old weather forecasting technology and insufficient sample data.

Local councils are therefore only able to provide daily pollution warnings for around 40 per cent of the country’s 424 official bathing sites in the sea and rivers, the researchers said.

Even at these sites, swimmers are not always being warned when the water quality in beaches or rivers is unsafe. as the Government’s “outdated” system is not always able to predict high bacteria levels in the sea, the study found.

The Environment Agency (EA) operates a forecasting system designed to predict when England’s bathing waters are too polluted to swim in. Separate forecasting systems are in place in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

The system combines weather forecast data with historical water quality sample data to predict the level of E.coli in the water on a given day.

When the level of bacteria is above a certain threshold, the EA issues an alert to local beach managers, who are employed by councils and put up signs to warn people against entering the water.

But the study found that warnings are not always being deployed when they should be, due to failures with the watchdog’s forecasting system.

Lead author of the report Karolina Krupska, an environmental scientist, told i one of the main problems with the system is that it does not make use of the best rainfall forecast technology available.

Water companies often release untreated sewage from pipes into bathing waters during periods of heavy rain as their infrastructure becomes overwhelmed, meaning rainfall is often a good predictor of bacteria levels in the water.

Ms Krupska said the EA could incorporate more modern rainfall prediction methods into its forecast system. She said the watchdog has already done this for its flood prediction system but the bathing water system is “behind”.

As a result, she said the bathing water system is not good at predicting sudden intense rainstorms and therefore warning of the likelihood of increased bacteria levels in the water. She added that this is a particularly problem as this type of weather is expected more often in the UK as a result of climate change.

In some instances, this can result in the system issuing warnings for the wrong locations or not at all. For example, the system failed to issue alerts for a number of popular beaches in Cornwall, following heavy storms in the areas in the summer of 2021, Ms Krupska said.

“There was a mismatch over the warnings given and what actually happened on the ground. So no warnings were given around really popular beaches in Newquay,” she said.

The study also found that the forecasting system relies on limited sample data for each bathing spot. The EA samples the water quality at bathing spots 20 times per year on random dates, meaning the samples are often not taken during a pollution event.

Ms Krupska said this means the watchdog is unable to provide warnings for all spots in England “because the model is not accurate enough to provide any kind of useful forecast”.

In 2023, the EA was only able to provide forecasts for 172 (41 per cent) of the 424 designated bathing sites in England. The forecasts are only provided during the official bathing season, which runs from May until September.

Some water companies operate their own warning systems, which are separate to the forecaster published by the EA and issue alerts when they are dumping sewage into the sea and rivers.

A final problem identified by the study is that the EA only provides pollution forecasts once per day, typically around 8am.

Ms Krupska said this means swimmers are often not made aware of pollution that occurs in the afternoon.

“Water quality changes rapidly and to keep people safe you really need to have an almost real time dynamic warning system … we don’t have that information so if something happens in the meantime the people just won’t know about the pollution until they see it or smell it,” she said.

She added: “With existing pollution warning systems, beach users don’t have good enough information to decide whether it is safe to go in the water. The science underpinning the next generation of bathing forecasting already exists, but a lack of action means these solutions have not been implemented.”

Campaigners have been calling on the EA to introduce a better system for monitoring the quality of water at bathing sites.

Among them is the University of Reading rowers who train on the River Thames, which has suffered from pollution due to sewage and chemical pollution from motorways an agriculture.

An Environment Agency spokesperson said: “We know how important our bathing waters are to local communities. That is why we monitor water quality at more than 400 beaches and inland waters across England – with more than 7,000 water samples taken and analysed during last year’s bathing water season alone.

“We already use a range of monitoring programmes and data and welcome additional research on forecasting pollution in waters, especially those used for bathing.”

The rivers of Britain and Ireland are in a desperate state from the impact of pollution, with not a single waterway in England or Northern Ireland listed as being in good overall health, a report said on Monday.

Sandra Laville www.theguardian.com

The Rivers Trust annual State of Our Rivers report reveals that the impact of pollution from treated and untreated sewage and agricultural and industrial runoff means rivers are in a worse condition than ever.

More than half – 54% – of rivers in England failed to pass chemical and ecological tests because of pollution from water industry releases of treated and untreated sewage, based on data from the EU-derived water framework directive (WFD) in 2022.

Agricultural pollution contributes to 62% of waterways in England failing to meet good standards for chemical and biological pollution. Urban runoff from transport contributes to 26% of rivers not achieving good overall status.

The report shows none of England’s rivers are in good chemical health, which means the concentrations of toxic chemicals are higher than the safe limit in every river. Failing to pass chemical tests means no river in England is considered to be in good overall health.

Just 15% of rivers pass biological markers for good ecological health. Ecological health looks at what is living in the river, and how modified it is. The presence, absence and abundance of species is a good indication of its general health.

Similarly, no stretch of river in Northern Ireland is in good overall health.

The trust’s chief executive, Mark Lloyd, said: “The State of Our Rivers report is a huge passion project for us, as it’s so important to ensure that science and evidence are at the heart of conversations about how to improve our rivers.

“However, it’s also much more than that, as it puts the data in the hands of the public so that they can join us in calling for the change that our environment so desperately needs.”

The Rivers Trust is calling on the public to push politicians to make changes to improve the quality of rivers. Healthy waterways help to mitigate the effects of climate breakdown, support wider ecosystem biodiversity, and improve health and wellbeing for communities, the trust says.

The key pollution markers in the WFD are a globally recognised test of the quality of rivers. But the Conservative government has made it clear it is going to diverge from these EU standards of monitoring in future as a result of Brexit.

In 2019, the last time the full water assessments took place, just 14% of rivers were in good ecological health and none met standards for good chemical health. There had been little or no improvement since, according to the Rivers Trust report, with rivers in a desperate state.

“Even the clearest-looking waters can contain microplastics, industrial chemicals, hydrocarbons, fertilisers and pesticides, and even pharmaceuticals,” the new report said. “Untreated sewage spills blight most of our rivers, and even treated wastewater still contains a cocktail of chemicals like pharmaceuticals, pesticides from veterinary flea treatments, nutrients and household cleaning products when it is returned to our waterways …

“Our rivers are not healthy – far from it and things haven’t improved since our last report in 2021.”

The trust said worryingly, data was more patchy than in 2019 when it published its last report because river sampling by the Environment Agency had decreased.

“Nearly 6% fewer river stretches receiving health classifications compared to 2019,” the report said.

Chemical pollution from ubiquitous, persistent and bioaccumulative toxins was found everywhere, the report said.

“Chemicals can persist in freshwater habitats for decades, so despite the lack of testing this time around, we can reasonably expect the chemical health of our rivers to still be very poor,” it said. “Our analysis of government data showed that, despite being banned 15 years ago, levels of the toxic ‘forever’ chemical perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) in freshwater fish in England is still found in concentrations on average over 300 times the levels deemed safe for aquatic life.”

The trust said more data was needed to truly understand the scale of the problems and deploy solutions to help rivers. But the government, since diverging from the WFD, has said it does not intend to publish results on river quality until 2025.

In England 85% of river stretches fall below good ecological standards and only 15% achieve good or above ecological health status.

Of the 3,553 river stretches the trust was able to gather data for, 151 had improved and moved up an ecological standard, but 158 had got worse.

The latest round of WFD assessments in 2021 revealed that 44% of Wales’s river stretches achieved at least good overall status. But Afonydd Cymru (Wales’s version of the Rivers Trust) has concerns about the way in which assessments for WFD are being carried out in Wales. It believes differences in waterbody status are more a reflection of differences in monitoring and reporting carried out by Natural Resources Wales, as opposed to any tangible environmental improvement.

In Scotland the proportion of river stretches assessed as being in good or better overall condition is now 57.2%, as found in Scottish Environmental Protection Agency classifications for 2022. This equates to an improvement in overall condition for 23 river stretches (to good status or better) since 2020.

In Ireland rivers are faring better with just over 50% of river water bodies achieving good or high ecological status. Ninety-four of the rivers in Ireland were not assessed for chemicals, but of the 193 that were surveyed, 60% failed and 40% passed standards.

A £1 billion home insulation scheme will take 60 years to meet its three-year target to help around 300,000 households, MPs have heard.

Richard Wheeler www.independent.co.uk 

The Government launched the Great British Insulation Scheme (GBIS) at the end of March 2023 to help people save money on their energy bills by making their homes more energy efficient.

But figures released this month show there have provisionally been 4,011 measures installed in 3,284 households up to the end of December last year.

For Labour, shadow climate minister Kerry McCarthy told the Commons: “The Great British Insulation Scheme is proving to be a great Tory insulation fiasco.”

Labour MP Kate Hollern (Blackburn) also said: “The Government’s latest energy efficiency policy – the Great British Insulation Scheme – was supposed to insulate 100,000 homes a year, but so far just 3,000 families have been helped in eight months; across Lancashire only 35 homes and in Blackburn only six.

“Can the minister explain why currently it will take 60 years to meet its three-year target?”

Energy minister Amanda Solloway replied: “Energy efficiency is incredibly important to this Government and in actual fact we have many schemes that are available.

“We have the Great British Insulation Scheme, which alone has committed £592 million.”

Paul Blomfield, Labour MP for Sheffield Central, added: “I hear what the minister has to say about the Great British Insulation Scheme – it comes after the Green Deal, it comes after the Green Homes grant but frankly it looks like another failure.

“There are 1.4 million people living in South Yorkshire but just 137 of their homes have been upgraded under GBIS.

“My constituents want their bills cut, they want to reduce emissions, they want homes insulated – what’s standing in the way is Government incompetence. When will the minister get a grip?”

Ms Solloway replied: “We’re spending £6 billion in this Parliament and a further £6 billion to 2028 on making buildings, including private rented properties, cleaner and warmer.

“This is in addition to the estimated £5 billion for the Eco4 and the GB Insulation Scheme up to March 2026.”

Labour MP Liz Twist (Blaydon) said just seven homes have been upgraded in Gateshead under the scheme as she questioned why there has been “such slow progress”.

Ms Solloway claimed the Government was making progress on insulating homes and pointed to schemes that are operating.

Elsewhere at energy security and net zero questions, Ms Solloway said “no decision” has been taken on the so-called “boiler tax” amid reports it is poised to be scrapped.

From April 2024, boiler manufacturers are expected to be required to match, or substitute, 4% of their boiler sales with heat pumps or face a £3,000 fine for each missed installation, rising to 6% in April 2025.

It comes as part of a Government target to help phase out gas boilers and deliver 600,000 eco-friendly heat pump installations a year by 2028.

Conservative former minister Dame Andrea Jenkyns said: “Talking of fuel poverty, the boiler tax results in consumers paying an extra £150 when they purchase a new boiler.

“Does the minister agree it’s now time to ditch these unworkable and unaffordable net-zero policies and let the British people decide how to heat their homes, what cars to drive and keep more of their own money?”

Ms Solloway replied: “No decision has been taken on this yet but we have a commitment to ensuring we do the very best deal to all of our constituents in this country.”

See companion post here

A major housing development should be blocked because underinvestment by Thames Water in the sewage system means it is unable to cope with the pressure of an increased population, the Environment Agency has warned.

Sandra Laville www.theguardian.com

Thames Water’s treatment plant in Oxford has been illegally discharging sewage for six years, causing significant risk to the rivers and environment from pollution, the EA has said.

The increased pressure on the sewage infrastructure from 1,450 new houses planned to the north of Oxford would pose an unacceptable risk of pollution into waterways, the agency said in a letter of objection.

It warned it was “not acceptable” for a new housing development to go ahead until Thames Water had carried out the required investment to bring the works within legal limits.

The revelations raise questions about the feasibility of the government’s housebuilding targets across the country with creaking infrastructure unable to handle existing levels of sewage.

Sewage treatment works in many areas are running at over capacity, and potentially illegally dumping sewage into rivers and seas. More than 2,000 treatment works run by several water companies are at the centre of a criminal investigation by the Environment Agency into illegal sewage dumping.

In a letter to the South Oxfordshire district council this month, the agency said the Oxford sewage treatment works, which deals with the waste from more than 200,000 people, has been running illegally in breach of its permit since 2017.

It objected strongly to the new development, which includes a primary school and new road system, saying the pressure on the sewage works would “pose an unacceptable risk of pollution to surface water quality”.

“Oxford Sewage Treatment Works is a site of significant concern” the EA said.

“In November 2021, the Environment Agency inspected Oxford STW, which led to Thames Water being issued with a compliance assessment report. Within this report, some serious and significant permit breaches were identified.

“While the site is noncompliant with its permit, the risk to the environment remains high.”

It went on to say as long ago as 2017 the treatment works was in breach of permit conditions.

Investment promised by Thames Water was supposed to bring the works up to standard by 2025, but the EA said: “This has been delayed by several years. The scheme and deadline are regulatory and legislative commitments, and failure to deliver it on time will potentially lead to further noncompliance at the site.

“It also presents a significant and ongoing risk to the receiving waterbody, particularly from continued and extended periods of storm overflows. Adding additional flows to the STW before this scheme is completed is not acceptable.”

As a result, the agency said it recommended that planning permission be refused.

Ash Smith, of Windrush against Sewage Pollution, welcomed the agency’s tough stance on the housebuilding. He said: “We are shocked and impressed to see the agency’s Thames region taking a long overdue stand against Thames Water polluting illegally for profit at Oxford.

“Is this a change in policy and a step towards sanity or will this outbreak of professionalism be stamped on by government to keep the shareholders happy?”

Thames Water had told the council there were no capacity issues with the treatment works that would impede the development of the 1,450 homes.

Jo Robb, a Green councillor on South Oxfordshire district council, said 5,000 new homes were planned in the area, all of which would connect to the Oxford treatment works, and this raised serious concerns.

“Time after time when there are major planning applications coming forward, Thames Water has consistently failed to identify capacity issues at its sewage treatment works,” she said.

“Now we see, in the strongest objection from the EA, that this treatment works has been operating illegally since 2017. So Thames Water absolutely cannot be trusted to identify capacity problems at its treatment works.”

There were major national implications regarding the need for new housing, Robb said.

“We have tens, possibly hundreds, of thousands of houses planned across the country which are going to be linked to treatment works that are not fit for purpose,” she said.

A Thames Water spokesperson said: “We work closely with developers and planning authorities across our region to ensure water and sewerage infrastructure can support growth, and where upgrades are needed to accommodate new developments, they will happen. We look at each development case by case and where needed will request conditions are added to planning applications, so for example, new homes are not occupied until the necessary upgrades to our infrastructure have taken place.

“We’re finalising plans for a major upgrade at Oxford sewage treatment works, costing more than £130m. This will provide a significant increase in treatment capacity, larger storm tanks and a higher quality of treated effluent going to the river.”

Ash www.windrushwasp.org

Prepare to be amazed.

The intro

For years the water industry has got away with murder. The victims have been those without a voice, the wildlife of the rivers, streams, lakes, and seas on the receiving end of water company pollution which should have been prevented by proper regulation and the enforcement of the law but wasn’t.

Overloaded sewers and water company indifference to pollution

People have also taken a hit but have not yet been killed, as far as we know, although many have been made very ill after contact with sewage pollution. It is, we know, only a matter of time.

Livelihoods have been affected, ranging from oyster fishermen to angling clubs and people’s lives have been made worse as the quintessential British places where children could paddle amongst a plethora of ducks, fish, and insects have been turned into grey, miserable and lifeless ditches . People even have to wonder about the safety of taking a paddle at the seaside, let alone swimming in it.

The most unlucky can’t even escape sewage at home where it is spilling from overloaded sewers into their streets and most recently I met a family who had their water company deliver a Portaloo to their garden. They could not use the toilet in their house because the passing sewer was already overflowing into the road and people driving by were splashing untreated sewage across the front of their home. The fact that it is mixed with rainwater seems to be the best water bosses can come up with to soften the blow as they keep the big bonuses and dividends flowing far more effectively than their sewerage systems.

Toilet paper and the stench of sewage as people drive, cycle and walk through untreated sewage. Try not to get sprayed by a passing car!

The story

Water companies have been allowed to set bills to upgrade sewage works and systems to cope with modern-day demands and loading from new housing but they have gamed the system and skimmed off the money in dividends and taken big bonuses for serving the shareholders, not the captive billpayers. How they did that is another tale but this one is about taking the billpayers money and not upgrading, letting the customer and environment take the hit while the Environmental Regulator – the Environment Agency in England, helps to cover up failure. Even worse, the Agency turns a blind eye to add new housing to hopelessly overwhelmed sewage works, while the companies take the connection fees and annual bills to increase profits.

Planning to fail

The charade of water companies claiming that they had the capacity to take more housing to demonstrably failing sewage works and overstretched sewer systems became the norm as the Environment Agency either nodded the application through, or more commonly, did not respond at all and even showed irritation about being asked the question. The shock horror of finding that houses should not be built until water companies got their works upgraded as they had been paid to do and were required to do, was put aside by pretending it wasn’t happening and everyone making money out of the deal was happy – the victims of the outcome, less so.

It was in response to this scam that WASP with the Envenlode Catchment Partnership paid for legal advice to underpin an initiative with West Oxfordshire District Council and has been commenting on planning applications to make sure that conditions are set for Thames Water to upgrade illegal sewage systems before accepting the occupancy of new housing. The effectiveness of the conditions is being tested with the first examples underway.

Read more in the previous blogs on housing and our use of Grampian Conditions to force improvements. (Here)

And articles in the Oxford Mail 1 & Oxford Mail 2

And The Guardian.

The Bombshell.

Something major is happening and for once it is good, and it is unfolding in Oxfordshire. In response to an application for 1450 houses and associated buildings to be bolted onto a massive development north of Oxford, the Environment Agency has pointed out in the clearest possible terms that Oxford Sewage Works is operating illegally and has failed to upgrade in the way it was required to and, so the Agency is objecting to the planning on that basis which must, of course, also apply to every other development that will load Oxford’s Sewage Works as of now.

In fact, that illegality dates back to 2021 when the Agency inspected the STW in reaction to the illegal activity reported by WASP’s data analyst, the redoubtable Prof Peter Hammond whose evidence to the Environmental Audit Committee inquiry was published in March 2021. The illegality in operation may go back to 2017.

Here is the Agency response:

We have written to the Secretary of State for the Environment, Steve Barclay – who knows a lot about the water industry, being married to a senior executive of Anglian Water – and the letter [can be downloaded as a pdf from a link in the original article] so we won’t repeat the content.

And if you can’t get the download easily – here are the 4 questions we ask the Secretary of State:

Some brave and good people in the Agency had the guts to point out that the Emperor (Thames Water) is not wearing any clothes and will have to go and buy some instead of spending the money on shareholders’ dividends, ‘other payments’ and bonuses.

The question now is whether water companies will be allowed to use their precarious financial positions to hold the government to ransom and let them keep on ripping off the billpayers or whether this or a future government will finally question the entirely predictable folly of allowing vital national infrastructure to fall into the hands of private profiteers whose only real skill is ensuring the maximum flow of money from the customer to shareholders in return for little, or in Thames Water’s case, nothing.

This is not about people, campaigners and now even the Environment Agency blocking development – This is the fault of Thames Water and previously failed regulation creating a black hole in the infrastructure. Just as you cannot build a house on sand without foundations, you cannot build housing developments without the infrastructure to support them.

We don’t think this could have happened before the new CEO Philip Duffy took over from the ducking and diving Sir James Bevan who hid the truth from Efra’s Parliamentary scrutiny committee. Now that the Agency has acted with integrity and professionalism it is vitally important that we support the people who are doing what they are supposed to do – stand up for the environment and against illegal polluters.

Oxford dumping 442 hours of untreated sewage continuously as of 530pm 26th February

Will the Environment Secretary and government support this seismic shift towards fixing the national scandal or will he fold up and give in to the powerful funds, largely overseas money, that owns our infrastructure?

Have we reached a turning point?

Paul Arnott

On New Year’s Day 2024 when I might otherwise be starting a book I’d been given for Christmas (still unopened, of course) I received a call from Cllr Geoff Jung. Geoff is the cabinet member for coast, country and environment at East Devon, an enormous portfolio that ranges from waste & recycling to sea defences and a watching brief on the environment.

On January 1st, and not for the first time, Geoff found himself inundated with calls about the sewage crisis in Exmouth. Could I come and have a look? They don’t tell you this when you stand to be a councillor, but you soon learn that dog poo, public toilets and sewage issues will play a central role in your life.

I zipped down to Exmouth, where hard-working tanker drivers had been drawing raw sewage out of the failed Phear Park pumping station and driving it across the town to its Maer Road Car Park sister station, where it was pumped under the sands of the Maer and into the sea. This noisy process kept hundreds of families awake and went on for weeks more.

While there, I was introduced for the first time to the superb leaders of ESCAPE, a proud acronym standing for “End Sewage Convoys and Poollution (sic) Exmouth”, as well as a group of local women who had reluctantly but wisely decided not to have their New Year’s Day swim after all.

A few weeks later, officials from the responsible body, South West Water, appeared by Zoom before the Scrutiny committee at East Devon. I loathe flat-track bullying and could see that, on the operational side of SWW, people are doing their level best, as are the tanker drivers. But much less persuasive is SWW’s executive narrative around how this – and many other crises from Budleigh Salterton to Seaton via Sidmouth – came to be in the first place. The executives seem reluctant to visit the recent past.

So, I’ll have a go for them. Simply, in the present day both foul water and rain water go down the same pipes. They should be separate. When there is heavy rainfall these days, the combined pipes are at risk of bursting. At which point SWW have to open the sluices and it all goes in the sea. Not before, however, it bursts up horribly through manhole covers in places like Clyst St Mary, or seeps through the ground in the Cranbrook country park, and into brooks and streams. And many other places too numerous to mention.

Just like the Post Office or Windrush compensation schemes, this is a here and now crisis seeded in past neglect which needs national government intervention. Put simply, the water regulator OFWAT is toothless, the Environment Agency has been defunded, and the private water companies pay money in dividends rather than sufficiently invest in infrastructure.

At East Devon District Council last week, we said enough is enough and passed a unique resolution of no confidence in SWW. To my mind we cannot make progress until we know how thousands of extra homes were permitted by the then Conservative East Devon District Council when as far back as 2010 it was clear that the infrastructure was already teetering on the edge.

Which raises the inevitable question as to whether more homes should be built today before that appalling lapse is corrected. I was disappointed but unsurprised that the Conservative leader and his chair of Scrutiny refused to vote for the resolution. These battles are not won in a day.

East Devon District Council (EDDC) will undertake £1 million worth of coast protection work along the Exmouth seafront.

Sandhya Suresh www.exmouthjournal.co.uk

The council has issued a public notice stating the significant intervention is to shield residential properties and commercial properties from the threat of coastal erosion.

The operation, focused around Exmouth coastal frontage from the Stewart Lines/Exe Fishing Building in the West to Sideshore at the East, involves an emergency replacement of a failed masonry seawall with a permanent sheet pile wall.

The council said the works will also include removing parts of the collapsed stone wall and driving sheet piles into the existing footprint of the vertical wall, all executed with a landward-side piling rig.

Although the newly installed wall will initially be left unclad, the council plans to add cladding at a later stage.

Council officials have made arrangements for the public to scrutinise details of the proposed work.

Copies of the plans will be available for inspection at East Devon District Council, Blackdown House, Honiton and at Exmouth Town Hall between 9am to 1pm, Monday to Thursday.

The council said any objections to the proposal must be submitted no later than March 20.

These objections must be served on the Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs and on East Devon District Council.

Any objections should include a clear statement of reasons and be delivered either by post or by email to the Chief Executive of East Devon District Council.

Notices to be posted may be addressed to the Secretary of State at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Flood Management, Nobel House, 17 Smith Square, London SW1P 3JR and to the Chief Executive at East Devon District Council, Blackdown House, Border Road, Heathpark Industrial Estate, Honiton, EX14 1EJ (email: Legal@eastdevon.gov.uk).

The UK competition watchdog has opened an investigation into eight housebuilders [Barratt, Bellway, Berkeley, Bloor Homes, Persimmon, Redrow, Taylor Wimpey, and Vistry] following evidence they may be sharing commercially sensitive information which may have kept prices high.

Henry Saker-Clark www.independent.co.uk 

The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) launched the probe amid concerns it could be affecting the development of sites and prices of new homes.

It came as the regulator warned that the housebuilding sector “needs significant intervention” amid concerns over the quality of new homes, “high and unclear” estate management charges and planning hurdles.

The CMA formally started a probe into state of the housebuilding sector and the private rental market in February last year.

On Monday, it said in its final report that the current planning system and limitations of speculative private development “have seen too few homes built”.

It highlighted “persistent shortfalls” in the number of homes built across England, Scotland, and Wales, with fewer than 250,000 built last year across Great Britain, compared with a target of 300,000.

Complex and unpredictable planning rules across the three nations are partly to blame for this, it said.

The report highlights that many planning departments are under-resourced, some do not have up-to-date local plans, and do not have clear targets or strong incentives to deliver the numbers of homes needed in their area.

It also said shortfalls were linked to requirements to speak with a wide range of stakeholders.

In addition, there were concerns over limitations to private speculative development, highlighting that developers often produce houses based on pricing rather than diversifying the types and numbers of homes they build to meet the needs of communities.

The report also found a rise in developers using estate management charges for facilities, such as roads, drainage and green spaces.

It said these charges are “often high and unclear to homeowners” and flagged that some unplanned charges can cost thousands of pounds.

Concerns were also raised that builders “don’t have strong incentives” for high quality and consumers have unclear routes of how to receive any redress when issues arise, with the CMA also highlighting an increase in snagging issues.

The watchdog said it is recommending the Government sets up a New Homes ombudsman to support homeowners over quality issues and requirements for councils to take over amenities on all new housing estates.

It came as the CMA also found signs that some housebuilders may be sharing commercially sensitive information with their competitors, which could affect property prices and weaken competition.

The investigation will look into Barratt, Bellway, Berkeley, Bloor Homes, Persimmon, Redrow, Taylor Wimpey, and Vistry. It has not reached any conclusions about whether the law has been infringed.

CMA chief executive Sarah Cardell said: “Housebuilding in Great Britain needs significant intervention so that enough good-quality homes are delivered in the places that people need them.

“Our report, which follows a year-long study, is recommending a streamlining of the planning system and increased consumer protections.

“If implemented, we would expect to see many more homes built each year, helping make homes more affordable.

“The CMA has also today opened a new investigation into the suspected sharing of commercially sensitive information by housebuilders which could be influencing the build-out of sites and the prices of new homes.

“While this issue is not one of the main drivers of the problems we’ve highlighted in our report, it is important we tackle anti-competitive behaviour if we find it.”

Housebuilders’ shares fell in early trading on Monday after the competition watchdog’s announcement.

As a result, shares in Barratt were down 1.4%, Taylor Wimpey fell 1.9%, Persimmon dropped 1.8% and Bellway was down 2%.

Owl admires the way local people in Exmouth and Budleigh are peeling away the secrecy surrounding South West Water’s operations.

[PS One of Owl’s “little birdies” whispered that these tankers cost around £1K a day.]

Petercrwilliams fightingpoolution.com

It’s nearly three weeks since Budleigh’s Marine Parade has become a lorry park, with up to 8 tankers parked up along the front at any one time.

There have been lots of varying reasons provided, including at least three from South West Water themselves. Most recently I’ve heard that the tankers were “dumping raw sewage into the sewage system here” (spoiler alert: they’re not!).

To understand what they are doing – and why it should be a really good thing for us – a quick recap on ‘Combined Sewage Overflows’ (or CSOs), and why they are the major cause of sewage spills in this country.

Sewer pipes have a finite capacity to transfer sewage to pumping stations or treatment plants. Because these sewer pipes carry rain-water run-off as well as raw sewage, the total volume entering the pipes when it’s raining, can be greater than the pipe’s capacity. For this reason, there are regular storm tanks incorporated into the sewer system, which act as temporary holding tanks to even out the flow. However, if these storm tanks fill up, they have an outlet that they open, called a Combined Sewage Overflow (CSO), which spills the excess water and raw sewage into a nearby stream or the sea. To avoid us seeing too much gory detail, the only treatment made is to filter this through a 6mm sieve before dumping it into our environment. These CSO’s are the #1 cause of sewage dumps in the UK.

In Budleigh, we have 2 CSO’s that dump into Kersbrook – on the edge of our Nature Reserve, another goes out to Otter Ledge (more on that next time!), and 5 CSO’s can dump sewage into the Knowle Brook which runs through Budleigh High Street. All except the Otter Ledge outfall end up on our beach.

In 2022 (the last year that SWW have released data for), Budleigh’s CSO’s dumped raw sewage 56 times, for a total duration of nearly 300 hours. Full details HERE. As that was an exceptionally dry year, it’s quite possible that 2023 was even worse (data to be released at end March).

So why are the tankers on Marine Parade ‘Good News’?

The key task they seem to be working on is to clean out the Marine Parade storm tank and associated sewer pipes. This CSO system appears to be over 100m long, running most of the way along the sea front. Over years, it’s become blocked with a mix of fat-bergs, ‘disposable’ wipes, sand and pebbles – reducing it’s holding capacity and flow. These are all now being sucked up into the tankers, and taken off for disposal. Because of the length of the tank and pipes, it’s taken 3 weeks and counting. Big thanks to the team who are doing this – it must be pretty unpleasant working conditions down there!

Marine Parade CSO was one of our worst offenders in 2022, with over 11 hours of sewage dumping onto the western end of Budleigh beach – so hopefully having the full capacity of the storm tank will reduce or eliminate that threat. The main beneficiaries of this work should be all those who swim around the Steamer Steps end of our beach.

We do have evidence that cleaning storm tanks can work here, as the CSO in Meadow Road was cleaned in 2021 – and zero spills were recorded there in 2022. Results are not guaranteed though, as the CSO at the bottom end of Granary Lane was cleaned out in January this year, but it is still recording sewage spills into the Kersbrook in the last month.

Let’s hope that this vital maintenance work marks a step in the right direction, and increases the number of days when we can all swim in clean, sewage-free water.

[Simon Jupp is Parliamentary Private Secretary to the Secretary of State for Transport, Mark Harper.]

From a correspondent: 

Devon County Council announced in January 2023 that they had secured funding through the Government Levelling up Fund for the extension to Dinan Way in Exmouth and investment in the Exmouth Gateway.  According to the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) which accompanies the bid, Devon County Council has to complete the works for the projects by March 2025. The bidding process started in 2021 when councils were dealing with the fallout of the pandemic to local services, so the work necessary to meet the strict deadlines for the bid process has imposed heavy demands on DCC staff and elected officials

Furthermore, the MOU also sets out very precise requirements for full consultation with residents, stakeholders and the district and town councils, without which the funding will be withheld. Full and meaningful consultation has not happened to the satisfaction of these parties.   The level of consultation has been woefully inadequate.   However, it is difficult to see how DCC can fulfil all these obligations within such a short timescale.  Council staff numbers have been cut back to the bone and DCC will struggle to ensure that the consultation requirements set out in the Government MOU can be met and the bid signed off in time to complete the project.

Compare these rigid delivery timescales with national government infrastructure projects.  In 2009 the original cost of HS2 was set at £37.5 billion.  By July 2023 the total project cost was estimated to reach £106.6 bn. The deadline for completion of 2033 has now been pushed to as late 2041 with large parts of the project being abandoned altogether.  Likewise the Prince of Wales aircraft carrier finally set off a year late in August 2023 at an increased cost of £3.2 bn. from £3 bn.

Why are the project deadlines so rigid for local councils when government projects deadlines and costs are so flexible? Once the work is completed on the Exmouth Gateway, the MOU prohibits any change for at least ten years.  It is not acceptable to impose an ‘enhancement project’ which could create traffic chaos and ultimately fail to deliver real improvements to the Gateway which cannot be changed for many years on the residents, businesses and visitors to Exmouth.

If Devon County Council could be given the time to undertake meaningful public consultations and adapt their plans to ensure best value for the project spend, this would  ensure far better use of government and local taxpayers’ money.  Perhaps our local MP who has been so involved in the LUF bid can intervene on Exmouth residents’ behalf and get these unrealistic and ultimately damaging deadlines removed.

• Agricultural livestock building phase 2 Drakes Farm Seaton Road Musbury Devon EX13 8AJRef. No: 24/0342/FUL | Validated: Fri 16 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Agricultural livestock building Drakes Farm Seaton Road Musbury Devon EX13 8AJRef. No: 24/0341/FUL | Validated: Fri 16 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• 24/0333/VARVariation of condition no. 2 (approved plans) of planning permission 21/1574/FUL – Creation of a dwelling and associated works as a replacement for the dwelling approved under Class Q previously. Includes changes in landscaping and fenestration, addition of a chimney, and some external rendering Barn Adjacent To Barley Way Ebford Lane Ebford Exeter EX3 0QXRef. No: 24/0333/VAR | Validated: Thu 15 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Proposed single storey extension to north/front elevation (resubmission of 23/0478/FUL) Pine Hollow Hulham Road Exmouth Devon EX8 5DXRef. No: 24/0335/FUL | Validated: Thu 15 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Construction of first floor extension. 11B Stoneborough Lane Budleigh Salterton EX9 6HLRef. No: 24/0327/FUL | Validated: Wed 14 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Discharge of conditions for 17/0532/MOUT : Condition 26 (noise impact) Exeter Logistics Park Werstan Road Clyst Honiton EX5 2GBRef. No: 24/0323/DOC | Validated: Wed 14 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Proposed Change of Use from residential Annexe (for ancillary accommodation) to a Holiday Let Uphills Greenway Lane Sidmouth EX10 0LZRef. No: 24/0311/FUL | Validated: Fri 16 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Single storey rear extension & new front porch Green Lane Farm Green Lane Chardstock EX13 7BLRef. No: 24/0317/FUL | Validated: Tue 13 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Proposed Change of Use from Shop (Class E, a) to Cafe (Class E, b), two side extensions and internal alterations. The Octagon Esplanade Exmouth Devon EX8 2AZRef. No: 24/0313/FUL | Validated: Tue 13 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Certificate of existing lawful development for the installation of movable, ground mounted solar panels, reasonably necessary for the purposes of agriculture. Broadhayes Farm Stockland Devon EX14 9ELRef. No: 24/0312/CPE | Validated: Tue 13 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Discharge of conditions for 23/2147/FUL: Condition 3 (Materials) Condition 4 (Landscaping) 21 Clinton Terrace Budleigh Salterton EX9 6RYRef. No: 24/0304/DOC | Validated: Mon 12 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• T1, Apple: fell to near ground level. T2, Laurel: fell to near ground level. T4, Field Maple: dismantle to near ground level. 2 Thorns Cottages Greenway Woodbury Devon EX5 1LRRef. No: 24/0302/TCA | Validated: Mon 12 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Discharge of condition for 21/1527/LBC: Condition 2 (Materials) Salston Manor Hotel Ottery St Mary EX11 1RQRef. No: 24/0307/DOC | Validated: Mon 12 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Discharge of condition for 23/1967/FUL: Condition 3 (Landscaping) Devonia South Street Colyton EX24 6PSRef. No: 24/0308/DOC | Validated: Mon 12 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• T1: Bay, reduce height by 2.5m and prune sides to shape; T2: Ash, reduce tips of branches by up to 1m; T3: Plum, reduce tips of branches by approximately 1-1.5m; T4: Pittosporum, prune away from property to achieve a minimum of a 1m clearance, thin canopy by up to 15%. 5 Thorns Cottages Greenway Woodbury EX5 1LRRef. No: 24/0306/TCA | Validated: Tue 13 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Retrospective application for the proposal for 2no. barber shop illuminated signs with clear lights, and 2no illuminated projecting barber shop signs that rotate with clear lights both at each end of the shop front sign 76 High Street Honiton EX14 1PDRef. No: 24/0297/LBC | Validated: Mon 12 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• The erection of an Agricultural building with Solar Panels Orchard View Payhembury Devon EX14 3JARef. No: 24/0305/FUL | Validated: Thu 15 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Front pitched roof dormer forming roof space conversion over a garage and replacement garage door. 6 Parkhayes Woodbury Salterton EX5 1QSRef. No: 24/0294/FUL | Validated: Mon 12 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Construction of 1.8m x 2.4m shed near entrance to property. Land East Of Lower Marlpits Farm Honiton EX14 9TBRef. No: 24/0284/FUL | Validated: Tue 13 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Proposal to install an electric vehicle charging unit Broadclyst House Broadclyst Exeter EX5 3EWRef. No: 24/0280/FUL | Validated: Wed 14 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• The installation of modular battery units with ancillary equipment, including power conversion units, 11kV transformer compound, switchroom, DNO substation and site office to provide standby, emergency electricity to support and facilitate renewable and low carbon energy projects. Land West Of Wareham Road HawkchurchRef. No: 24/0276/FUL | Validated: Fri 16 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Retrospective agricultural livestock building. Lane End Farm Broadhembury Honiton EX14 3LURef. No: 24/0264/FUL | Validated: Tue 13 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Creation of 2 No. off street parking spaces. 11 Newlands Park Seaton EX12 2SFRef. No: 24/0258/FUL | Validated: Mon 12 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Roads and infrastructure details complete with access road realignment of approved scheme to serve 9 houses Waterleat High Street Newton Poppleford EX10 0DURef. No: 24/0255/FUL | Validated: Fri 16 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Proposed dwelling 2 Halsdon Avenue Exmouth EX8 3DLRef. No: 24/0241/FUL | Validated: Mon 12 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Construction of single storey side extension, replacement garage and rear 1st and 2nd floor dormer extensions. 245 Exeter Road Exmouth EX8 3NGRef. No: 24/0240/FUL | Validated: Fri 16 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Variation of Condition 2, (approved plans), and removal of condition 3, (external materials), on application 23/1376/FUL, (Erection of rural workers dwelling). Spurtham Farm New Road Upottery Honiton EX14 9QDRef. No: 24/0218/VAR | Validated: Fri 16 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Replacement conservatory 5 Brand Close Honiton Devon EX14 2FERef. No: 24/0197/FUL | Validated: Tue 13 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Permission in principle for construction of a minimum of 1 dwelling to a maximum of 9 dwellings Land Between Shercroft Close And Spenco Station Road Broadclyst Station BroadclystRef. No: 24/0181/PIP | Validated: Fri 16 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Technical details consent for 1no. new dwelling (following approval of 22/2407/PIP) 4 The Green Exmouth Devon EX8 2QRRef. No: 24/0178/TEC | Validated: Tue 13 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Insertion of new window in gable (side) elevation May House Musbury Axminster EX13 8ARRef. No: 24/0159/LBC | Validated: Thu 15 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Proposal to install an electric vehicle charging unit Broadclyst House Broadclyst EX5 3EWRef. No: 24/0141/LBC | Validated: Wed 14 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• T2, T3 Beech: crown reduce both trees by up to 3ms, maximum diameter of cuts 50mm. Wyndhams Higher Broad Oak Road West Hill Devon EX11 1XFRef. No: 24/0131/TRE | Validated: Fri 16 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Replace 3no. windows on ground floor south elevation with 12mm heritage double glazing; insert 4no. sills on first floor south elevation, remove existing cement render to external walls on the west and south elevations and re-render in lime Halls Farm Higher Metcombe Ottery St Mary EX11 1SSRef. No: 24/0112/LBC | Validated: Thu 15 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Certificate of Lawfulness for the proposed occupation of the dwelling by persons, none of whom would be employed or last employed in agriculture.The Haven Curscombe Feniton EX14 3EURef. No: 24/0115/CPL | Validated: Thu 15 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Retrospective application for the proposal for 2no. barber shop illuminated signs with clear lights, and 2no illuminated projecting barber shop signs that rotate with clear lights both at each end of the shop front sign 76 High Street Honiton Devon EX14 1PDRef. No: 24/0102/ADV | Validated: Mon 12 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Demolish existing bungalow, 1 no. replacement dwelling Oak Tree House Old Ebford Lane Ebford Devon EX3 0QRRef. No: 24/0108/FUL | Validated: Wed 14 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Block up and reposition 1no. door on side south elevation at ground floor; block up 1no. window and reposition 1no. window on side south elevation at ground floor; remove a windows on the side south elevation at ground floor, remove internal partition wall between kitchen and dining room and removal of cupboard wall at ground floor 24 Temple Street Sidmouth EX10 9AYRef. No: 23/2721/LBC | Validated: Mon 12 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Replace 1no. existing window with fire escape window at second floor north elevation; smoke curtain at top of internal staircase on second floor; install metal handrail to external metal staircase at 2 Corn Mill on west elevation Corn Mill Otter Mill Ottery St Mary Devon EX11 1AFRef. No: 23/2658/LBC | Validated: Thu 15 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Replace 4no. windows with fire escape windows at first floor south elevation; replace 1no. window with fire escape window at first floor west elevation; replace 1no. window with fires escape window at second floor west elevation; create 1no. new fire door/wall in apartment 5 on first floor; create 4no. new fire door/wall in apartments 7, 8, 9 & 10 on second floor; create 4no. fire door/wall in apartments 12, 13, 14 & 15 on third floor; create 4no. fire door/wall in apartments 18, 19, 20 & 21 on fourth floor; create 1no. new fire door/wall in apartment 17 and create 1no. fire door in apartment 17 on fourth floor Town Mill Otter Mill Ottery St Mary Devon EX11 1GTRef. No: 23/2654/LBC | Validated: Thu 15 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Proposed Internal Alterations, Side Extension, Loft Conversion/Extension (lifted roof), Front and Rear Dormers and New Front Porch. Morningside Vicarage Road East Budleigh Devon EX9 7EFRef. No: 23/2613/FUL | Validated: Fri 16 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Discharge of conditions for 23/1556/FUL : Condition 3 (External Materials), Condition 4 (Landscaping) Egremont Barn Payhembury Honiton EX14 3JARef. No: 23/2593/DOC | Validated: Mon 12 Feb 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision

Ageing buildings at the Royal Devon & Exeter Foundation Trust mean its repair bill rose by one of the largest amounts last year across England.

Bradley Gerrard www.devonlive.com

New figures provided by the BBC show the RD&E’s repairs backlog more than doubled from more than £68 million in the 2021-22 financial year to £146 million in 2022-23.

This means that it experienced the sixth biggest percentage rise last year out of England’s NHS trusts. However, it still does not put the trust in the top 10 for the highest overall repairs backlog, which ranges from £193 million at tenth-placed University Hospitals Birmingham NHS Foundation Trust through to £734 million at first-placed Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust.

In total, the estimated bill to complete so-called high-risk repairs needed at England’s NHS acute hospitals has swollen to £2 billion – up more than a third compared to the previous year.

The RD&E Hospital (Wonford) in Exeter was built between 1992 and 1996, and the trust said large parts “tipped over into ‘not good condition’ as defined by the Department of Health and Social Care because it is in the 30-35 year old age bracket”.

The trust’s current form began in April 2022, when it brought together the assets from the RD&E NHS Foundation Trust and the Northern Devon Healthcare NHS Trust.

“This increase in the total number of assets has also added to the rise,” a spokesperson for the RD&E said.

“There is a medium-term plan in place to address the repair backlog at the RD&E, whereas North Devon District Hospital is one of the 40 new hospitals, which when rebuilt will address the issue.”

The NHS describes North Devon District Hospital as “the most remote acute hospital in mainland England,” adding that many of its building are over 50 years old “which can result in challenges delivering care.”

The government had pledged to build the new hospital by 2030, but earlier this month Shona Dunn, second permanent secretary at the Department of Health & Social Care, said it is “now expected to complete after 2030”.

The RD&E spokesperson said the trust is exploring whether a phased-build programme for the North Devon District Hospital could be implemented to help it “mitigate some of our infrastructure risks sooner.”

The spokesperson added that the level of repair backlog is “measured continuously” with “higher-risk areas then addressed in the short term where capital funds are made available.”

However, its core capital funding – cash that would be used for repairs – is “currently overcommitted”, the spokesperson added, meaning that the highest priority jobs had to be dealt with first.

Fortunately, RAAC, or reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete, which is blighting a host of hospitals and schools across the country, is not an issue for the RD&E Trust.

“There is one non-clinical, non-structural area in the North Devon District Hospital which is affected by RAAC, however this area has been surveyed and confirmed as low risk and fit for purpose,” the spokesperson said.

A total of 86 trusts provided a response to the BBC Shared Data Unit, revealing at least 1,385 reports of infrastructure problems, impacting the care of at least 1,055 patients.

When SWW faced EDDC’s scrutiny committee recently, Waterfit Live was claimed to be the answer to most councillors’ questions.

This section of this morning’s South West Water’s Waterfit Live map shows three active discharges in Exmouth, Sandy Bay and Budleigh. Locals know there are more potential sites than these.

Below, for comparison, is the Rivers Trust map showing the actual locations of combined sewage overflows (brown spots) at similar scale but in much greater detail.

Surely we need to know from SWW exactly which outfall has spilled, not a generalised “blob”?

WaterFit Live

Rivers Trust map of existing outfalls

Only liberals drink skimmed milk to go with their faux leather sandals. Full fat, creamy milk will nourish your inner Tory.

Listen to Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg MP for North Somerset and 19th Century here

The Environment Agency’s Climate Resilient Otter Catchment (CROC) scheme has been handed £1,184,800. The initiative involves eight projects around the River Otter with a focus on land and soil management, as well as local farming practices. Sidbury Manor Estate’s River Sid catchment scheme has been given £240,000.

Welcome funding in what is now regarded as a marginal constituency. – Owl

Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs www.gov.uk

Forty projects which will use natural processes such as planting trees and creating wetlands to reduce the risk of flooding are set to benefit from a £25 million government programme, Floods Minister Robbie Moore announced today (Friday 23 February).

Part of the government’s plan to increase the nation’s flood resilience, natural flood management processes protect, restore, and mimic the natural functions of catchments, floodplains and the coast to slow and store water.

Community, charity and council projects set to benefit from the £25 million Natural Flood Management programme include:

Severn Rivers Trust will carry out a mixture of natural flood management measures in the headwaters of Illey Brook, near Halesowen in the West Midlands. Many of these works will focus on soil and land management – slowing and storing surface water runoff, while also reducing soil erosion and supporting agriculture. New woodland areas and hedgerows will support wetland complexes and the creation of new habitats.

The Ribble Rivers Trust has proposed a number of projects focusing on slowing river flows across the Ribble catchment, in Darwen, Clitheroe and Lea Green. Swales, ponds and leaky barriers across watercourses will slow and store floodwater in the upper reaches of the River Darwen catchment, whilst vegetation management and new woodland will intercept the flow of water as it runs downhill, reducing runoff and enabling water to be stored in the soil.

The announcement comes after a wide range of applications were submitted to the Environment Agency by community groups, environmental charities and councils for grants, following the launch of the largest-ever investment in natural flood management schemes in September last year.  The Environment Agency led a review of these applications, with input from Defra and Natural England. 

Environment Agency chair Alan Lovell said:

It’s exciting to see such appetite for Natural Flood Management, recognising its value in providing not only benefits against flood risk but also wider support for nature recovery.

I’m proud of the role the Environment Agency is playing in leading this pioneering programme. We look forward to working with partners to help natural techniques become a mainstream option for flood protection and help create more climate resilient places.

Floods Minister Robbie Moore said:

It’s vital we use nature as an ally in our work to become ready for climate change, helping to restore the natural environment and protecting homes and businesses. That’s why we’re funding the biggest-ever investment in natural flood management – and it’s great to see the huge demand.

These schemes will complement traditional bricks-and-mortar defences, all funded by our £5.2 billion flood programme. This programme is one more part of our plan to bolster flood resilience and shield communities – all whilst boosting biodiversity, restoring habitats and protecting the environment for future generations.

Mark Lloyd, chief executive of The Rivers Trust, said:

We warmly welcome this significant fund which will not only protect people and businesses from flooding, but will also make more space for nature, purify pollutants, recharge groundwater aquifers, lock up organic carbon and create amenity value for communities.

The new funding builds on the £15m natural flood management pilot programme which ran until 2021, creating the equivalent of 1.6 million cubic metres of water storage and reducing flood risk to 15,000 homes.

The Environment Agency is managing the new £25 million programme with work taking place from now until March 2027.

The programme will help meet the goals of the National Flood and Coastal Erosion Risk Management Strategy for England, which provides a longer-term vision of how we will better protect and prepare homes and businesses from flooding and coastal change and create climate resilient places.

It also supports the Government Policy Statement on Flood and Coastal Erosion Management, which highlights the importance of harnessing the power of nature, and the Environmental Improvement Plan, which recognises the need to mitigate and adapt to climate change with the use of nature-based solutions. Investing in natural flood management will support the government’s plan to better protect communities while tackling climate change and benefitting nature.

To find out more about the Natural Flood Management Programme and for a full list of successful projects refer to our Gov.uk pages and below.

Successful applicants and schemes:

• City of Doncaster Council, Bentley NFM Opportunities
• Northumberland County Council, Alnmouth Coastal scheme
• National Trust, Common Farm Hydrological Restoration
• National Trust, Resilient Coledale
• Community Forest Trust, Whitewell Brook NFM
• Ribble Rivers Trust, Ribble Revival: Darwen Community Catchment
• Ribble Rivers Trust, Ribble Revival: Clitheroe Community Catchment
• Ribble Rivers Trust, Ribble Revival: Wrea Green Community Catchment
• Wyre River Trust, Wyre Catchment Resilience Programme
• Brampton 2 Zero CiC, Brampton Natural Flood Management Project
• National Trust, Poynton and Micker (Norbury) Catchment Plan (Headwaters)
• Cheshire Wildlife Trust, Meols Natural Flood Management Scheme
• Mersey Rivers Trust, Alt Catchment NFM
• Woodland Trust, Smithills Estate NFM 2024
• City of Trees Trust, Cromton Moor Slow the Flow Leaky Dams
• Severn Rivers Trust, Illey Brook NFM
• Leicester City Council, Leicester Urban NFM – Willow Brook Catchment
• Nottinghamshire Wildlife Trust, Saving Worksop and Shireoaks through NFM
• Nottinghamshire County Council, Cropwell Butler Natural Flood Management
• Lincolnshire County Council, Barrow Beck Chalk Stream Restoration
• East Mercia Rivers Trust, Field Beck NFM – Holdingham, Sleaford
• Lincolnshire County Council, Building Flood Resilience in the River Rase Catchment
• National Trust, Northey Island Causeway Saltmarsh Management
• River Waveney Trust, Diss Natural Flood Management
• Essex County Council, Hockley Woods Leaky Dams
• RSPB, Beneficial Use of Dredged Sediment (BUDS) in the Blackwater Estuary
• Norfolk County Council, North Attleborough Flood Alleviation Scheme
• London Borough of Hillingdon, Pinn Meadows Natural Flood Management
• South Oxfordshire District Council, The Goggs, Watlington NFM Scheme
• Surrey County Council, Ash Ranges NFM
• High Weald AONB Partnership (East Sussex County Council), High Weald AONB NFM Project (Alder Stream)
• RSPCA, Marsham Valley Natural Flood Management Partnership
• The Friends of Cannizaro Park, Cannizaro Park NFM Programme
• Royal Borough of Greenwich Council, Marsh Dykes and Thamesmead Flood Alleviation Network
• High Weald AONB Partnership (East Sussex County Council), High Weald AONB NFM Project (Crawley – Stanford Brook)
• National Trust, Swan Brook Wetlands
• Dorset AONB Partnership, hosted by Dorset Council, West Dorset Rivers & Coastal Streams Natural Flood Management Programme
• Sidbury Manor Estate, Sidbury Manor Estate & The River Sid Catchment
• Environment Agency, Climate Resilient Otter Catchment (CROC)
• Westcountry Rivers Trust, Climate Resilient Mevagissey

Devon County up by 4.99%;  Police by 4.95%;  East Devon District by 3.19%

Who is being most careful with your money?

Though, in truth, both County and District are underfunded, suffering continuous austerity cuts. – Owl

(Council Tax is split: 73% DCC; 12% Police; 7% EDDC; 4% Fire; 4% Towns & Parishes)

East Devon District Council agrees its budget for 2023/24

Eastdevon.gov.uk 23 February 2024

Council continues to protect front line services with additional support given for leisure services to help with the inflationary pressures they are experiencing.

At its Full Council meeting on Wednesday 22, February, East Devon District Council (EDDC) Councillors agreed to a £5 a year (3.19%) increase in a Band D property council tax increase.

The council continues to take 7p in every pound of the total Council Tax bill with the rest of the money going to Devon County Council, Devon and Cornwall Police, Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue Service and town and parish councils.

Councillor Jack Rowland, EDDC Portfolio Holder for Finance said:

“Whilst any increase in the EDDC element of the Council tax is regrettable in the current inflationary period the increase is 3.19% and £5 per annum for the average Band D rate payer.

“That is less than a 10p per week increase and despite, in real terms, losing over £50 million over the last decade in Central Government grants this EDDC budget for 2023/24 is providing the required balanced budget required by law as well as preserving services.

“For 2023/24 the average Band D ratepayer will be paying £161.78 per annum to EDDC, which is equivalent to just over £3 per week for services such as the waste and recycling collections, the Streetscene service in maintaining many parks and open spaces, the contract with LED Community Leisure to operate the swimming pools, gymnasiums and other sport and leisure activities in the district as just a few examples of the services provided by EDDC.”

A citizen science programme has revealed the decline of one of the country’s most significant chalk streams after claims by Environment Agency officials that it had not deteriorated. 

Jon Ungoed-Thomas www.theguardian.com

The SmartRivers programme run by the charity WildFish, which surveys freshwater invertebrates, reported “strong declines in relation to chemical pressure” on the River Avon in Wiltshire. It said its data indicated a decline in the condition of the river over the last five years.

The charity compiled a report on its findings after the conservation groups say they were told at a meeting by the Environment Agency in August that “the Avon has not deteriorated in water quality in the last five years”. David Holroyd, head of water quality for Wiltshire Fishery Association, said the numbers of invertebrates collected in spring and autumn samples from 2019 and 2023 at 11 sites on the upper Avon had shown a decline.

He said the invertebrates were “the canary in the coalmine” and data suggested they were being “poisoned by chemicals in the river”.

WildFish says the findings highlight the crucial role played by citizen scientists in monitoring river health after a fall in the number of tests conducted by regulators in the last decade. The SmartRivers programme in England, Wales and Scotland now covers 95 rivers, according to a new report by the WildFish charity.

Freshwater invertebrates underpin the aquatic food ecosystem, ranging from riverflies and beetles to molluscs, worms and crustaceans. In the most recent results for all monitored rivers in 2022, volunteers found 268 different invertebrate species and counted 343,077 specimens. Invertebrate species have different tolerances to pollution. An analysis of the species present, along with their numbers, helps identify pressures on water quality from farming, sewage discharges and run-off from roads and residential areas.

Janina Gray, head of science and environmental policy at WildFish, said the ecological condition of a river was assessed under the water framework directive, a European Union directive transposed into legislation for England and Wales after Brexit. She said the current assessments “did not set the bar high enough”.

The Environment Agency had maintained the Avon had not deteriorated under the water framework directive classification in the meeting in August, said Gray, adding: “It is frustrating that the river is declining year on year and the legislation is not protecting it. This is one of the most protected rivers we have in this country. It is very diverse in terms of its fish population. If we can’t protect the Avon, there’s probably not much hope for many other rivers. We need a comprehensive monitoring network to be able to determine where the problems are happening which is why the SmartRivers is so important.”

Gray said WildFish was now working with the Environment Agency and other partners to identify the pressures on the river. An Environment Agency spokesman said: “On the River Avon, we are working with partners in the area to explore how we can best utilise citizen science evidence alongside our own monitoring data to further increase understanding of water quality.”

A recent analysis by WildFish reported that every river sample in the Windermere catchment for the SmartRivers programme was affected by United Utilities wastewater treatment works. It found that pollution-sensitive riverfly species showed declines of up to 76% compared with appropriate upstream habitat.

United Utilities said the plants operated in line with environmental permits.