A Devon cabinet member is upset at the lack of detail in the government’s spending review linked to reforms of the special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) system.

Bradley Gerrard www.midweekherald.co.uk

Cllr Denise Bickley (Liberal Democrat, Sidmouth) cabinet member for Send at Devon County Council, said “It was very sad not to hear it mentioned at all and have it bundled in with [upcoming] reviews and plans.

“I am glad it will be dealt with and hope the forthcoming white paper will provide a scheme to fix the things that are going wrong, but that isn’t helping today, which is a shame.”

The spending review provides for a £3.25 billion transformation fund to contribute towards the “reform of the Send system to improve pupil outcomes” – with £760 million between now and 2027/28.

“Details of the government’s intended approach to Send reform will be set out in a schools white paper in the autumn,” the documents said.

Devon’s Send service has built up a cumulative overspend of more than £130 million, and it has around 9,800 education, health and care plans (EHCPs),  documents that specify additional help individual pupils need in school.

These cost an average of £17,000 per plan, according to figures from the county council earlier this year.

The overspend is allowed to be kept outside the council’s main finances, but rules allowing that expire in March unless they are renewed.

At breaking point

Cllr Bickley says the system is “already at breaking point” with mainstream schools being asked to take on more responsibilities, including children with additional needs, but usually without extra financial support.

She added the funding formula also disadvantages Devon, given its rural nature meant its bill for transporting children to school is far higher than an urban council’s.

Cllr Bickley, who has only been in the cabinet post for a few weeks, said the council had, before she took on the role, sent feedback to government about what it wanted to see in the Send review.

“We want to help get what is needed and we need to work with all parts of the education system, as well as parents, to make sure the system works for children,” she added.

“Safeguarding money is important, as we cannot just write a cheque for the needs that there are, but then that means children and parents are not getting what they are entitled to, so it is a very hard balancing act.”

Last year, Devon County Council secured £95 million from the Department for Education through a Safety Valve scheme, which gave grants to councils with large Send overspends.

The money is paid over eight years, and comes with strings attached, such as a requirement for councils to contribute cash to tackling the deficit and improving the service.

Maybe – Owl

Government will fund Cullompton railway station

Two south west MPs have claimed a hard-fought victory in relation to a funding pledge for railway stations in two towns in Devon and Somerset.

Bradley Gerrard, local democracy reporterwww.radioexe.co.uk 

Richard Foord, the Liberal Democrat member for Honiton and Sidmouth, and colleague Gideon Amos, the Taunton and Wellington member, had been hoping the chancellor Rachel Reeves would mention cash for the reopening of Cullompton and Wellington railway stations in her spending review, but were disappointed by the time she left the despatch box having not mentioned the projects.

But Mr Foord has now said the Treasury has confirmed to him that funding would be allocated to the two projects.

Some other local politicians suggested more caution, though, given funding had been pledged for the project before, and then the scheme had been shelved due the change in government after the 2024 general election.

Cllr James Buczkowski, who represents Cullompton on Devon County Council and is also a Mid Devon District Council councillor, said he was “really pleased” the two MPs had continued their fight for the stations, but noted he was “cautiously optimistic”.

“It’s fantastic that we have two MPs who have tirelessly fought for these stations but it was disappointing that the government was not very explicit about the funding for the infrastructure that Cullompton needs,” he said.

“I will wait for the formal announcement from the Department for Transport to see what that entails, and until contracts are signed with them, like they have been with the Cullompton town centre relief road, I won’t get too excited.”

He added it was positive news the funding seemed to be available, but noted that it had been announced and withdrawn previously.

“Until I see wet ink on paper, I’ll hold my celebrations for now,” Cllr Buczkowski said.

Mr Foord has previously argued that the reopening of Cullompton station is vital to make the forthcoming development of around 5,000 homes at Culm Garden Village more sustainable.

“It has been a long campaign over many years, with hundreds of people determined to secure this historic outcome,” Mr Foord said in a statement after claiming to have secured confirmation of the funding from the Treasury.

“Working alongside my Liberal Democrat colleague, Gideon Amos MP, we have raised this issue at the highest levels of government, making a strong case to the chancellor, the transport secretary and the rail minister.”

Mr Foord added that Mid Devon District Council had put together an “irrefutable business case for the reopening of the station.

The MP added the new station would mean residents could “beat congestion in the town”, a reference to Cullompton’s virtually daily queues that form at the town’s junction 28 of the M5.

Rachel Gilmour says government fails the county

Since publication Richard Foord MP for Honiton has now said the Treasury has confirmed to him that funding would be allocated to the two projects.

However, some other local politicians suggested more caution, though, given funding had been pledged for the project before, and then the scheme had been shelved due the change in government after the 2024 general election. – see separate post.

Bradley Gerrard, local democracy reporter www.radioexe.co.uk 

A Devon MP has criticised the government’s spending review for giving “nothing” to Devon.

Liberal Democrat Rachel Gilmour, who represents Tiverton and Minehead, said the announcement failed to support the county or Somerset.

“Nothing for Devon, nothing for Somerset,” she said.

“The spending review feels like a missed opportunity to draw a line under years of Conservative mismanagement, which damaged our public services, left our NHS on its knees, social care and Send teetering on the edge, and school and hospital buildings crumbling – and begin to deliver the change people were promised.

“The government must understand that we can’t fix the NHS if don’t fix social care.”

Ms Gilmour said that while her party welcomed the investment of £29 billion a year into day-to-day NHS spending, she is shocked at the “deafening silence on the social care crisis in the chancellor’s speech”.

“That spoke volumes,” she said.

“NHS investment will be wasted if hospitals can’t discharge patients who don’t need to be there – and if local authorities don’t have the resources to care for people in their homes, preventing them going to hospital in the first place.

“The government must stop dragging its feet and conclude their social care review by Christmas.”

Farmers also seemed to be hit as a result of the spending review, Ms Gilmour claimed.

“Following the budget, this spending review provided the perfect opportunity to change course and back our farmers and rural communities, yet our farmers are still being left to carry the burden of budget cuts,” she said.

“This is unacceptable, and shows that the government have, once again, not considered UK food security.”

Labour claims its funding settlement shows its “steadfast commitment to farming, food security, and nature’s recovery”.

Spending review documents said: “The government will invest more than £2.7 billion per year in sustainable farming and nature recovery from 2026-27 until 2028-29.

“Farmers will benefit from an average of £2.3 billion through the Farming and Countryside Programme and up to £400 million from additional nature schemes.”

On NHS funding, the spending review stated the £29 billion additional annual cash through to 2028/29 would take spending to £226 billion by that year, equivalent to a three per cent annual boost.

“This investment will support the NHS to deliver the government’s Plan for Change commitment, meaning that by the end of the parliament, 92 per cent of patients will start consultant-led treatment for non-urgent conditions within 18 weeks of referral,” the spending review document said.

Since publication Richard Foord has now said the Treasury has confirmed to him that funding would be allocated to the two projects.

However, some other local politicians suggested more caution, though, given funding had been pledged for the project before, and then the scheme had been shelved due the change in government after the 2024 general election. – see separate post.

Bradley Gerrard www.midweekherald.co.uk 

A Devon MP has criticised the government’s spending review’s strategy which he describes as “unacceptably” failing to invest properly in the westcountry.

Richard Foord, the Liberal Democrat member for Honiton and Sidmouth, said the “vast majority” of funding is targeted at the north of England, the Midlands, and London.

Neither Devon nor the south west are mentioned in initial government documents released following the announcement on Wednesday.

“The westcountry has missed out on essential investment yet again,” Mr Foord said.

“Devon wasn’t even mentioned in the spending review, and this is particularly galling given the 15 per cent cut to the rural affairs budget that will hit farmers and nature-friendly farming schemes.

“It will have devastating implications for our environment, for food security and for our rural economy.”

Spending review papers show that the administrative budget for the Department for Food and Rural Affairs, known as Defra, will fall from just over £1 billion this financial year to £962 million by 2029/30.

The government claims its funding settlement shows its “steadfast commitment to farming, food security, and nature’s recovery”.

“The government will invest more than £2.7 billion per year in sustainable farming and nature recovery from 2026-27 until 2028-29,” the documents said.

“Farmers will benefit from an average of £2.3 billion through the Farming and Countryside Programme and up to £400 million from additional nature schemes.”

Mr Foord said he is also “disappointed that the government is doing next to nothing” to resolve the crises in special educational needs and social care.

£15bn in transport projects announced but not here.

UK’s Shared Prosperity Fund (SPF) to help boost local economies (important for Cornwall) is being replaced by a “new local growth fund”, aimed at “mayoral city regions in the North and Midlands”, as well as investing in up to “350 deprived communities across the UK” – maybe, Owl

Spending review frustrates South West transport campaigners

Some politicians, railway campaigners and residents in the South West have expressed disappointment following the Government’s spending review on Wednesday.

Cameron Weldon, Jack Silver www.bbc.co.uk 

Chancellor Rachel Reeves announced £15bn of new investment in transport projects last week, and none of the money has so far been earmarked for named projects in Devon or Cornwall.

Reeves pledged funding for affordable homes, health, defence and schools but any areas in the South West set to benefit have not been spelt out at this stage.

Some campaigners and local residents had hoped her speech would have included additional investment for the region – such as funding to bring back Cullompton’s railway station.

Mid-Devon district councillor Steve Keable said the “political reality” was that Reeves was “playing into her Labour heartland” by prioritising other parts of the country.

Keable, who represents Taw Vale for the Liberal Democrats, said he hoped to find out “over the next few days” what would happen to “the capital funding that Cullompton and Mid Devon are so looking forward to”.

He added that the Cullompton Station project, as well as a separate project to build an additional junction on the M5 south of the town, could not “progress before we get the go ahead”.

Some local residents remain supportive of the railway station project.

“I think it would boost the economy of the town,” one said, adding: “I think it needs some money to push local businesses forward.”

Another local resident said the station was “always used before” and felt “the trains would be used more” if the station was rebuilt.

One mother said it would be “fantastic” if the station came back, adding: “My children would have access to days out – it would be really wonderful for everyone.”

Cornwall Council was awarded £184m in January by the UK’s Shared Prosperity Fund (SPF) to help boost the local economy.

However, the government announced this week it would be replacing the fund, which itself was originally established to replace EU funding by the last Conservative government.

Cornwall previously received about £400m of Objective One funding from the EU as it contained some of the poorest areas in England and Wales.

The government said it planned to establish a “new local growth fund”, external aimed at “mayoral city regions in the North and Midlands”, as well as investing in up to “350 deprived communities across the UK”.

Jayne Kirkham, Labour MP for Truro and Falmouth, said she had been told the money from the fund would be distributed by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG), adding: “So that will come a bit later.”

“We are hoping that is coming soon and what the SPF might be morphing into,” she said.

Andrew George, Liberal Democrats MP for St Ives, said money for Cornwall should be ring-fenced if “there [was] ring-fencing for other nations”.

George said Cornwall had “rightly” received the investment over the last 25 years.

“Now what we want to happen is to make sure Cornwall is treated as it has been over that period,” he said.

Four cliff falls at Jacob’s Ladder were reported a couple of weeks ago, now Exmouth seafront roads have been closed by “ectoplasm”.

South West Water are not thought to be involved. – Owl

Weird slime covers Devon seaside road as police say it’s like ectoplasm

Shannon Brown www.devonlive.com

A mysterious gooey substance caused a cyclist to crash and end up in hospital and closed a coastal road in Devon.

Queen’s Drive and Maer Lane in Exmouth was closed at the roundabout while clean-up crews dealt with what has been described as a “slime that bears a very strong resemblance to ectoplasm”.

Devon County Council closed the road near the RNLI lifeboat station, Exmouth Police said.

The road was reopened by around 1.30pm.

The weird substance was “super slippery and very gooey” according to Exmouth Police.

One cyclist was taken to hospital after being “taken off” by the slime.

“Devon County Council have closed the Seafront by the lifeboat station, as well as Maer Lane,” Exmouth Police said.

“The roundabout is covered in a mysterious slime that bears a very strong resemblance to ectoplasm!

“It’s super slippery and very gooey. It has already taken off one cyclist who is currently in Exmouth Hospital.

“We do not feel it causes a wider human health implication at this time.”

Exmouth Police continued: “Despite best efforts by colleagues from East Devon District Council street team and Devon County Council Highways, we are unable to either identify of remove the substance.

“It just won’t clean off and its not through lack of serious trying with industrial jet washes, road sweepers, etc (we know that Tony form Exmouth Town Council in his brand new road sweeper would have sorted it)!

“DCC’s closure is pending a specialist environmental cleaning contractor arriving which may be some hours.

“We have considered South West Water activity in the area but it appears to not be their cargo.”

Rapid spreading “Nimbus” Covid wave looks set to hit UK this summer

Scientists fear the UK will see a new Covid wave this summer as the new “Nimbus” variant spreads rapidly around the world.

Tom Bawden inews.co.uk

The NB.1.8.1 variant – which has been dubbed Nimbus – is thought to be more contagious than the other active Covid variants, although there is no evidence that the symptoms are any more severe.

At the same time, the immunity Britons have built up from jabs and previous infections has waned considerably after relatively few cases of Covid over the last six months and a prolonged period of low vaccination levels.

As such, scientists are concerned the Nimbus variant could push up cases in the UK after sending infections soaring in China, Singapore and Hong Kong.

There are already signs that the Nimbus is spreading fast in the UK after its share of new Covid infections (from all variants) jumped from 2 per cent on 28 April to 11 per cent on 12 May, the latest date for which data is available, according to the COVspectrum database.

And while new infections are still well below the peaks seen last summer and autumn, there are signs that cases are starting to pick up in the UK.

New figures from the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) today indicate that new Covid infections rose by about 7 per cent in the week to Sunday 1 June – and are around 80 per cent higher than at the start of March.

It is not clear when any new wave would occur or how big it would be, but scientists say they do expect to see a spike in infections over the next month or two.

“We are very likely to see a spike of infections over the next couple of months, possibly by later this month or in July. But it’s difficult to predict the level of this infection wave,” Professor Lawrence Young, a virologist at Warwick University, told The i Paper.

“Population immunity, either from vaccination or previous infection, is waning and, unlike other respiratory viruses such as flu, the Covid virus continues to spread in hot and humid weather.”

“The NB.1.8.1 variant has driven surges of infection in Asia over the spring and is now the dominant strain in Hong Kong and China. It is also spreading in the US and Australia,” Professor Young said.

“Preliminary evidence from lab studies suggests that NB.1.8.1 can infect cells more efficiently than previous variants and that it can partially evade the immune protection provided by antibodies from vaccinated or previously infected people”.

Professor Young urged those who are eligible to take up their booster vaccines as the World Health Organisation has said that jabs still offer good protection against severe disease from infections by the Nimbus variant.

Free vaccines are still available for people aged 75 years and older, residents in care homes for older people, and those aged six months and over with a weakened immune system until 17 June in the current spring booster campaign.

Professor Christina Pagel, a healthcare data analyst at University College London, added: “It’s quite possible we will see a large wave of infection here in two months or so once it becomes dominant.”

Professor Steve Griffin, of Leeds University, said: “The UK has been fortunate not to have a major wave of Covid infections since last autumn. But a recent surge in cases in South East Asian countries, signifies that the relatively quiet spell may be coming to an end.”

Professor Paul Hunter, of University of East Anglia, said: “I guess we will see some increase in reported infections. I doubt case numbers will be as high as this time last year though I cannot be 100 per cent certain on this. But we do need to follow its progress”.

The UKHSA said today that 5.9 per cent of those people with respiratory symptoms testing for Covid in hospitals tested positive in the week to Sunday.

That “positivity rate” compares to 16.2 per cent in last July’s peak and 2.3 per cent at the start of the year.

Positivity rates among hospital patients with symptoms are typically much higher than infection rates in the general population – figures which are not available for the UK outside of winter.

Although the figures are not available for the UK and only cover England, scientists say they give a good indication of trends and across the four nations.

Final push for new Devon railway station near M5

The fate of Cullompton railway station and its sister project in Wellington, Somerset, will be revealed at the end of the government’s spending review on June 11.

Daniel Mumby, Alex Richards www.devonlive.com 

Richard Foord MP (Honiton and Sidmouth) and Gideon Amos MP, (Taunton and Wellington) have been fervently campaigning for the two stations for months, engaging with transport ministers, participating in Westminster Hall debates and organising a parliamentary delegation in April.

Mr Amos raised the issue in the House of Commons on Wednesday (June 4), shortly after the chancellor announced over £15bn for UK-wide transport projects – an announcement which failed to provide any reassurance about the new stations.

“The chief secretary [of the Treasury] will know that the benefits of the Cullompton and Wellington stations project would bring tens of thousands of people to the city, the metro region and the Cardiff-Bristol-Exeter corridor. Thanks to a cost-benefit ratio of almost 4:1, will he acknowledge the strength of the case for that project, as set out in the letter he received from his honourable friends the members for Weston-super-Mare (Dan Aldridge), for North Somerset (Sadik Al-Hassan) and for Exeter (Steve Race) – and from me and my honourable friend Richard Foord?”.

Somerset Council has thrown its support behind the proposed new stations at Cullompton and Wellington which are anticipated to draw tens of thousands.

Planning permission was given in May 2024 by the council for a housing development on Nynehead Road, which includes provisions for station access, and detailed designs for the spine road, featuring pedestrian and cycle links, as well as plans for an inviting ‘station square’, were greenlit.

West of England Developments (Taunton) Ltd, responsible for the forthcoming homes and roads, has assured that the site earmarked for the station will remain safeguarded from any future development should officials decide against it. The government’s commitment to rail investment was reinforced with assurances from Darren Jones, Chief Secretary to the Treasury and MP for Bristol North West, who expressed gratitude to Mr Amos for his persistent advocacy on the matter.

He stated: “I thank the honourable member for his campaigning and for welcoming today’s news of historic levels of investment into the west of England for transport.

“The best use of the money is to make sure that not only do we deliver infrastructure within our combined authorities, but that opportunities are unlocked for broader spending decisions on intercity transport, heavy rail, road investments, new housebuilding and industrial policy spending.

“The review of the Green Book has been looking at this and further details will be published next week. However, I am confident that we will be able to unlock opportunities for areas outside the combined authorities, and the investment announced today makes a stronger case for doing so.”

Mr Jones added that the government would publish its “infrastructure strategy” shortly after the spending review which would lay out how the government would address supply chain issues and other problems in delivering major transport projects.

A fascinating analysis by the BBC.

[This was written late last week just as Reform Chair, Zia Yusuf, announced his exit, 48 hours later he re-entered stage right. Par for the course in the leadership turmoils of Reform. – Owl]

Joshua Nevett www.bbc.co.uk 

Reform UK’s success in the recent local elections has propelled many councillors with limited or no political experience into council chambers across England.

While Reform UK’s rise was the big story of those elections, almost half of the councils up for grabs were not won outright by any single party.

That means many of those newbie councillors are now navigating so-called hung councils, where parties with little in common often work together to get the business of local government done.

But so far, it hasn’t panned out that way for Reform UK, which isn’t involved in any formal coalitions, pacts or deals in areas where there were local elections this year.

This was despite rampant speculation about Reform-Conservative coalitions ahead of the polls, with party leaders Kemi Badenoch and Nigel Farage not ruling out council deals.

So, what’s going on?

In some places – Warwickshire, Worcestershire and Leicestershire – Reform UK has enough councillors to form minority administrations and is attempting to govern alone.

In other areas where coalitions were possible, Reform UK has either shunned co-operation or vice versa. Where Reform UK has explored potential partnerships locally, its policies have been viewed with suspicion by the established parties.

In Cornwall, the Liberal Democrats, Labour and the Conservatives refused to work with Reform UK, even though it was the biggest party and had won the most seats.

Instead, the Lib Dems teamed up with independent councillors to run Cornwall Council as a minority administration.

That infuriated Reform UK’s group leader in Cornwall, Rob Parsonage, who branded the coalition deal “undemocratic” and “a total stitch-up”.

Did other parties contrive to exclude Reform UK? The newly minted Lib Dem council leader, Leigh Frost, does not think so.

“The reality is our core values at heart of it just stand for two very different things and it makes working together incompatible,” Frost told the BBC.

“And then Reform was given two weeks to try to form an administration and chose not to.”

Frost said Reform UK’s Cornwall candidates mainly campaigned on immigration.

This was echoed in conversations with other local party leaders across the country.

The BBC was told Reform’s candidates had little local policy to offer and mostly focused on national issues, such as stopping small boats crossing the English Channel.

[For the record two Reform councillors, out of 28, have not yet attended any meeting in Cornwall and another three have only attended half the number they were slated to attend – Owl]

Slashing “wasteful spending” by councils, like Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (Doge) in the US, was also a common campaign theme.

In Worcestershire, where Reform won the most seats but fell short of a majority, the party’s supposed lack of local policy was a major sticking point for the Conservatives.

“They haven’t got a local prospectus and that was part of the problem,” said Adam Kent, Tory group leader on Worcestershire County Council.

“They didn’t stand on any local issues. It was on national politics. How can you go into coalition with somebody if you don’t even know what they stand for?”

Joanne Monk, the Reform UK council leader in the county, said she only had “a brief couple of chats” with other party leaders but was uncompromising on coalitions.

“I’m damned sure we’re not on the same wavelength,” she said.

She followed the lead of Farage, who ruled out formal coalitions at council level but said “in the interests of local people we’ll do deals”, in comments ahead of the local elections.

In Worcestershire, Reform UK’s minority administration may need to do deals to pass key decisions and avoid other parties banding together to veto their plans.

Recognising this, she acknowledged other parties were “going to have to work with us at some point”.

In Northumberland, the Conservatives retained their position as the largest party and gave the impression they were willing to entertain coalition talks with Reform UK, which gained 23 seats.

“I said I would work with anyone and my door is open,” said Conservative council leader Glen Sanderson.

“But Reform the next day put out a press release saying the price for working with the Conservatives would be extremely high. So on that basis, I assumed that was the door closed on me.”

No talks were held and the Conservatives formed a minority administration.

Weeks had passed after the local elections before Mark Peart was voted in as Reform UK’s local group leader in the county. As a result, he wasn’t in a position to talk to anybody.

“Everything had already been agreed,” Peart said. “It was too late.”

Reform UK sources admitted the party was caught a bit flat-footed here and elsewhere as many of its new councillors got the grips with their new jobs in the weeks following the local elections.

A support network for those councillors, in the form of training sessions and a local branch system, is being developed by the party.

But this week Zia Yusuf, one of the key architects behind that professionalisation drive and the Doge cost-cutting initiative, resigned as party chairman, leaving a gap in the party’s leadership.

Reform UK’s deputy leader, Richard Tice, said the party’s success at the local elections “was partly because of the significant efforts and improvements to the infrastructure of the party” spearheaded by Yusuf.

Though Yusuf is gone, the party has considerably strengthened its foundations at local level, after gaining 677 new councillors and two mayors.

A Reform UK source said party bosses will be keeping an eye out for stand-out councillors who could go on to become parliamentary candidates before the general election.

They said in areas where Reform UK runs councils as a minority administration, it’s going to take some compromise with other parties and independents to pass budgets and key policies.

In the messy world of town halls and council chambers, that could be a tough apprenticeship.

Political opposition has an important role to play in all levels of democratic government but it needs to be conducted seriously, in a consistent and principled way, not through broadcasting hypocritical nonsense through social media. – Owl 

From Independent Cllr. Paul Hayward’s facebook post 7 June

Having now met with most of my fellow Councillors at DCC, and most of the newly and democratically elected Reform group, I am somewhat disappointed that their supporters and campaigners in East Devon insist on claiming that the new administration at DCC (of which I am not a part I must add) has acted in an undemocratic way by not appointing any Reform Councillors to the Cabinet. The words “disgraceful” have been bandied about by social media commentators and elected cllrs alike.

I can understand why they might be disgruntled, and upset, but that is politics, but it is certainly not undemocratic. For if it were, then they would leap at the chance to also criticise Leicestershire County Council where Reform won 45% of the seats on a 32% total vote share, and have formed a minority administration themselves, with 100% of all Cabinet seats being shared amongst their group – plus the Chair and Vice Chair.

Nothing unlawful or unusual about that – to the victor, the spoils etc – but it is a little bit hypocritical to then criticise another political group at another County Council with a similar cllr demographic and then also refuse to publish a comment making that observation in the interests of transparency and veracity.

I look forward to working with all my DC Cllr colleagues in the greater interests of helping everyone in Devon, and I also wish all Cabinet members the very best as they face the unenviable task of trying to unpick the financial maelstrom that is engulfing DCC, like so many larger authorities with adult and child care responsibilities and expenditure.

I would beseech local campaign teams to get involved in helping their elected councillors do the very best in their communities rather than putting out social media commentary that glaringly overlooks what their own party is doing elsewhere in the country.

Updated 1900 to include an example from the Reform Exmouth and Exeter East face book page.

Text reads:

NO MAJORITY. NO FAIRNESS.

On May 1st, no party won a majority… but the Liberal Democrats have chosen to fill Devon’s Cabinet entirely with their own councillors, bar one seat handed to the Greens!

Reform came a strong second in seat numbers. We’ve been given ZERO Cabinet roles.

For a party that champions proportional representation, this decision says it all.

Our 18 Reform councillors will now focus on Scrutiny Committees: holding the council to account, protecting taxpayers’ money and fighting for the people who elected us.

We are here to do the job you voted us in to do!

Council Leader Paul Arnott will write a letter to the secretary of state outlining the council’s fears about the bill, and will seek endorsement of it from other councils once it has been written.

East Devon council anger at Planning and Infrastructure Bill

Bradley Gerrard www.exmouthjournal.co.uk

Anger has emerged from a Devon council about aspects of a major bill that will impact how planning applications are decided.

The Planning and Infrastructure Bill could see fewer applications decided by councillors at planning committees, with more being decided by planning officers.

It could also give the government the power to set the size of a council’s planning committee, and require its members to undertake specified training.

Members of East Devon District Council’s cabinet expressed dismay at the bill, which has now passed three of the five stages in the House of Commons, before it heads to the House of Lords and, if approved there, it will then become law.

Cllr Todd Olive (Liberal Democrat, Rockbeare and Whimple), said the government’s own environmental watchdog had raised concerns.

The Office for Environmental Protection (OEP)’s chair, Dame Glenys Stacey, said the bill has “fewer protections for nature” than existing law, and that creating “new flexibility without sufficient legal safeguards could see environmental outcomes lessened over time”.

Cllr Olive is concerned about what any new law could mean for places like East Devon’s pebblebed heaths and the Exe estuary.

“I want to ask the leader to work with leaders of other planning authorities and write to the secretary of state [Angela Rayner MP] to set out our position on this appalling bill, but also to brief our MPs,” he said.

Cllr Paul Arnott (Liberal Democrat, Coly Valley), the leader of the council, agreed that writing a letter made sense, but suggested that it drafts one and then seeks supporting signatories, rather than trying to curate a letter in tandem with other councils.

Cllr Richard Jefferies (Liberal Democrat, Tale Vale), portfolio holder for environment (nature and climate) said he felt the bill was “cynical” in its approach that proposed contributions from developers to protect nature but to then take away other ecological protections.

“If there is no net gain, then it doesn’t seem sensible to me,” he said.

Fellow environment portfolio holder Cllr Geoff Jung (Liberal Democrat, Woodbury and Lympstone) said: “There are some very good proposals [in the bill] but some very disturbing proposals too.”

“One classic example is how it will treat habitat mitigation, as at the moment, here and in Teignbridge and Exeter, I think we do a good job as we are local and understand the area.

“But to take that way and give it to Natural England doesn’t make sense; we all know the issues more than these big quangos and taking this out of local peoples’ hands and putting into a national body does seem to be going in the wrong direction.”

Exmouth member Cllr Nick Hookway (Liberal Democrat, Exmouth Littleham) added that the bill was “extremely concerning” and would worry residents about the potential impact on the Exe Estuary.

Some members were irked by the notion that the bill would require councillors to undergo certain training, even though some is already provided by the council.

“The bill mentions training and that if it isn’t completed then a councillor can be prohibited from taking part in the planning committee,” said Cllr Paul Hayward (Independent, Axminster).

“But the MPs who issue these rules that they impose on councillors never seem to apply them to themselves… so if this does happen, then perhaps MPs should have to undertake mandatory training before passing acts of parliament that impact people.”

The cabinet agreed that Cllr Arnott would write a letter to the secretary of state outlining the council’s fears about the bill, and would seek endorsement of it from other councils once it had been written.

Across the 12 Reform-controlled councils, 33 meetings have been cancelled or postponed within the first nine weeks since the election.

Additionally, at least 21 Reform councillors have missed their first meetings, despite the majority of these only having had one meeting to attend in their first month.

[For comparison with Devon, four Reform councillors out of 18, that is 22% or nearly one quarter, have missed the first two meetings in Devon County Council. This looks significantly higher than the average of two councillors per Reform-led councils quoted above.] – Owl

Athena Stavrou  www.independent.co.uk 

Councils taken over by Reform UK have been left in a state of “paralysis” as dozens of key meetings are cancelled and newly elected councillors fail to show up.

Nigel Farage’s party won huge victories in May’s local council elections, gaining control of nine councils and minority control in a further three.

However, opposition councillors have claimed organisation and productivity have been a “shambles” since the election, with some claiming the Reform representatives “do not know what they’re doing”.

Across the 12 Reform-controlled councils, 33 meetings have been cancelled or postponed within the first nine weeks since the election.

Additionally, at least 21 Reform councillors have missed their first meetings, despite the majority of these only having had one meeting to attend in their first month.

The worst-affected councils are Kent and Nottinghamshire, where Reform holds 57 and 39 seats respectively.

In Kent, nine out of the 22 meetings – 40 per cent – scheduled have been cancelled since the election up to July 4. That compares to just 15 per cent in 2024.

These include legally required meetings such as the governance and audit committee, a crucial part of local government structures, ensuring accountability and transparency of the council’s finances.

Other meetings, such as the police and crime panel, were cancelled as membership of the committee was yet to be confirmed – something opposition councillors say suggests their Reform counterparts “are not ready or prepared” for their roles.

In Nottinghamshire, four of the 10 meetings scheduled had been cancelled in the first nine weeks.

These include the governance and ethics committee and the overview committee, which is responsible for scrutinising the operation of the chief executive’s department.

Opposition councillor in Kent, Rich Lehmann, said the cancellations were “shocking” and made him question whether Reform was capable of leading the council.

“Reform did better than anyone expected, and clearly better than they expected as well,” he told The Independent.

“There’s a general feeling among opposition councillors that a number of elected councillors are not ready or able to attend committee meetings that take place during the day.

“The fact they’ve not even named who is sitting on committees suggests they are having trouble filling committee places and that’s why they’re being cancelled.

“No one knows what’s going on. There’s a lot of confusion.”

Kent is the home of Reform UK’s first Elon Musk-style Department of Government Efficiency (Doge) unit, which has been set up to look at “wasteful spending” in councils.

The announcement on Sunday evening came as a surprise to many councillors, Mr Lehmann said, who claimed the move was a “barrage of distraction” from the “paralysis” the council is in.

It is understood that Reform UK councillors have chosen to cancel meetings with the intention of rescheduling them once they are more prepared. It is also understood that as the meetings were scheduled by the previous administration, they were not scheduled to the new Reform council’s timetable.

In Nottinghamshire, the opposition Conservative group said the cancellations had sparked “serious concerns about leadership, accountability, and the future of local service”.

“This is a shambolic start from Reform,” said Sam Smith, leader of the Conservatives.

“Scrapping every key meeting in their first full month in charge is not only reckless—it’s dangerous. This puts public services at risk and shows just how unprepared Reform really are.”

He added: “There’s no excuse for this. They should be in their offices, speaking to officers, and getting to grips with their jobs. Instead, the car park is empty, and the council is effectively leaderless. This is what happens when you elect people who had no plan and no idea what the job involved.”

While local councils are independent bodies responsible for their own decisions, it is understood that the government expects them to operate within the law and to hold meetings in order to deliver for residents.

Kent County Council said some meetings, such as planning committees, were scheduled on an ‘if required’ basis, and were cancelled because there were no applications requiring an immediate decision.

A spokesperson said: “Regarding the changes to the meeting calendar, a number of meetings were squeezed into June due to the election and induction period preventing them from being held in May as would be the case in a non-election year. Because there are no time-sensitive issues due at these June meetings, consideration is being given to deferring business to relevant July meetings to make best use of member and officer time.”

The Independent contacted Nottinghamshire Council’s new Reform leader Mick Barton for comment. He did not respond but told Local Democracy Reporters the comments are “political rhetoric from the opposition”.

He said: “That’s absolute nonsense. We’ve only been here three weeks. We’re still setting policies, we’re having weekly cabinet meetings with officers to find out what we’re going to be doing going forward.”

A massive cliff protection scheme is likely to go ahead this year after a council agreed to bring forward investment.

Miles Davis www.bbc.co.uk

Seaton Hole on the south coast has suffered repeated major landslips that have left beach users and coastal homes in danger.

East Devon District Council said 7,000 tonnes of rock must be delivered by sea to Seaton by September to be able to press ahead with the project before prices go up.

The council’s cabinet recommended an upfront investment of £673,500 this year to enable the £2.2m scheme to go ahead with a final decision due to be made by full council on 18 June.

The council said the decision was “critical to help reduce delays and cost increases”.

Geoff Jung, cabinet member for environment at East Devon District Council, said: “Approval from council will allow us to push ahead and order the new rock to ensure best value for money now, as delays may result in higher costs being incurred next year.”

The project included increasing the volume of existing rock armour at the base of the cliffs, upgrading the steel baskets used to hold rocks in place and maintaining the current seawall.

The total cost is expected to be £2.2m and has already been approved by the Environment Agency.

The council said it was confident planning permission would be granted, as no major issues were raised during the pre-application process.

The report said there was a “small risk”, external of not getting planning permission but “in the worst-case scenario” that would result in the council having rock armour for future schemes.

What about the Brixham crypto outbreak and all the sickness already reported this year in Budleigh?

Is it because of its “outstanding business plan”?

Or is it to ensure the retention of existing management talent and avoid any radical reset? – Owl

Caroline Voaden, Lib Dem MP for South Devon, said it was baffling why South West Water bosses had not had their bonuses banned. “It’s hard to think of a company more deserving to have its boss’s bonuses banned than South West Water,” she said. “Not only did the company preside over the cryptosporidium outbreak in the relevant financial year, but in June, just weeks after the outbreak, South West Water’s CEO saw her salary increased by £300,000, proving their absolute contempt for affected customers.” Source Guardian

Six firms under bonus ban

Under the beefed-up Water Act, six firms are banned from paying bonuses this year including Anglian Water, Southern Water, Thames Water, United Utilities, Wessex Water and Yorkshire Water.

The ban, which is backdated to April 2024, means regulator Ofwat can force firms to claw back bonuses that have been paid or face enforcement action. It applies to share awards as well as cash.

It is part of new measures in the Water Act which comes into force on Friday.

Environment Secretary Steve Reed said that water company bosses “should only get bonuses if they’ve performed well, certainly not if they’ve failed to tackle water pollution”.

Officials said the government would look into companies trying to get around the ban by raising executives’ base salaries.

But Liberal Democrat Environment spokesperson Tim Farron called the government’s announcement “half-baked”.

He added that it “doesn’t touch the sides in enacting fundamental reform – especially if water companies can still workaround bonuses and wriggle off the hook”. Source BBC

Government must follow Cunliffe recommendations and then go further to fix failing water system

Published by Wildlife and Countryside Link (Link), the largest environment and wildlife coalition in England, bringing together 89 organisations to use their strong joint voice for the protection of nature.

wcl.org.uk

Environment groups are calling for bold urgent action from the Government in response to the National Water Commission’s interim report released today.

The public are rightly outraged by the state of England’s waterways. The Independent Water Commission has exposed failings in water company governance and financial controls, shortcomings in political planning and prioritisation, and a lack of cross-sector coordination and accountability for environmental management.

Charities are calling on the Government to start work now on vital reforms that will cut pollution and restore nature. They highlight that creating a new Regional System Planner – as recommended by Cunliffe – will take time. To ensure all sectors responsible for water pollution can play their part and be held to account, the Government should commit now to setting up this new body.

In other areas, the interim report stops short of final recommendations. However, it clearly recognises that water companies need stricter controls to ensure they work in the public interest and cannot profit at the expense of the environment. The Government must introduce new regulations with robust public interest tests and ensure civil society and environmental voices are properly heard in decision-making.

Some steps can and must be taken immediately, while others require a bold Water Act to deliver long-term, legally enforceable reform. The group make the following recommendations:

Richard Benwell, CEO of Wildlife and Countryside Link, said:

 “This interim report is a clear signpost, not a finishing line. The public are rightly angry about pollution and regulatory failure, and nature is in crisis. The Government must start work now to put in place a Regional Systems Planner with powers to align planning and spending decisions to restore river catchments.

“Even where the Commission has yet to make final recommendations, the findings of failings suggest a clear direction of travel. Politicians must stop equivocating and set clear strategic direction for environmental recovery. Strong, enforceable targets are needed for water quality that can be applied across sectors. Where in the past polluters have got away with profiteering, public interest tests must be built into every layer of operations and governance with consequences for failure.”

Quick wins:

Wildlife and Countryside Link is calling for the immediate implementation of several key proposals:

Mark Lloyd, CEO of The Rivers Trust, said: “Water is fundamental for nature’s recovery, for the growth of the economy, for the health and security of communities and for life itself. We will press the Commission over the next month to shoot for the stars rather than the moon in its final report. We will then expect to see the Government move swiftly and boldly to realise this high level of ambition.”

James Wallace, CEO of River Action, said:

 “We only have one chance to get it right. The public mandate for change is overwhelming and so is the urgency. What comes next must be decisive, enforceable, and in the public interest. We urge Sir Jon Cunliffe to give us more, much more. Nothing short of a systemic overhaul of how water companies are owned, funded, operated and regulated will do.”

Ali Morse, Water Policy Manager at The Wildlife Trusts said:

 “The Commission’s interim report emerges at a time when environmental protections are under threat from proposed planning laws, and budgets for nature look set to be slashed. This doesn’t look like the actions of a Government that is serious about restoring our chalk streams, or averting the extinction of water vole and Atlantic Salmon. To convince us otherwise, we need to see Government responding with measures that ensure water companies prioritise the health of rivers and seas, that past harms are made good, that other sectors too play their role, and that environmental regulators are equipped and supported to do their jobs. Only this will ensure that we have a healthy, thriving water environment that society and nature can both benefit from.”

Giles Bristow, CEO of Surfers Against Sewage, said:

“Ending the pollution crisis in our wild waters was an election issue acknowledged on the steps of Downing Street by the Prime Minister Keir Starmer. This report clearly identifies a broken privatised water system but stops short on systemic solutions to fix it. Until it is replumbed to prioritise the public health and the environment over profit for investors, an angry public will continue to swim and surf in a deluge of sewage that is destroying our rivers, lakes and coastal waters. We need tougher recommendations to government in the final report to help fix this system for good!”

Read more in our evidence to the Water Commission here: Blueprint for Water response – Independent Water Commission Call for Evidence.

Restoring public confidence is the key aim of the Cunliffe Review. ( Interim report published earlier this week.) 

In launching it the government recognized that a fundamental reset of the water sector was needed to address the systemic issues, and pave the way for a more sustainable and reliable water system.

But does it look like we are getting this fundamental reset?

Feargal Sharkey doesn’t think so:

Cunliffe report won’t make one atom of the UK’s water any cleaner

Feargal Sharkey www.thetimes.com 

Before the election, during the election and after the election, the government promised us a complete root-and-branch review, a wide-ranging re-examination and a complete reset for the water industry. We were promised champagne but today we’ve been offered sour milk.

I actually have some empathy for Sir Jon Cunliffe, bearing in mind the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs is at the very epicentre of the utter shambles that is the modern water industry.

And yet it is the very government department that not only provides Cunliffe’s secretariat to his independent water commission but, more importantly, took that reset and turned it into an exercise of nothing more than shuffling furniture around, looking at regulation and investment.

He focuses on a whole bunch of things that are already within the gift of government to fix. For example, planning. London is running out of water and we haven’t built reservoirs in decades.

Well, as it turns out, [the former minister] Michael Gove almost fixed that problem seven years ago when he amended the planning legislation to make reservoirs part of the national infrastructure. So those decisions now go straight to the planning inspector.

When Cunliffe talks about priorities and ambition and the direction of travel from government and the regulators being confused, that needs statutory guidance. That is issued by government to Ofwat and the Environment Agency, setting out the government’s priorities. Steve Reed, the environment secretary, could fix all of that this afternoon by simply reissuing the guidance.

The idea of more regional planning is simply window dressing. This has been discussed for 35 years. There is nothing new.

I’m afraid in this case, Cunliffe has just been “Sir Humphrey-ed” — ie never establish a commission unless you already know the outcome.

None of this actually addresses the fundamental underlying issues within the industry. It’s a failed system of regulation.

I have said this to Cunliffe: none of what he’s talking about will actually make one atom of water, anywhere in this country, any cleaner. I was chatting to someone this morning who was in a car looking at Lake Windermere, which was turning green as we spoke.

I don’t think he’s taken on board anything anybody suggested. I have sympathy for him, however, because he’s been blatantly told by government to avoid the big issues. In Sir Jon’s words, and he is quoted as saying it, his job is to simply make the current system better. Well, when the current system is institutionally dysfunctional, institutionally discredited and institutionally incompetent, why bother?

When it comes to Cunliffe’s report, I had absolutely no expectations for it whatsoever. And he has not disappointed.

In terms of the big, ugly issue sitting at the middle of this, he’s been told not to get involved in it. That issue is a restructuring of the ownership of these companies.

There is nothing in Sir Jon Cunliffe’s report or the government’s current strategy that is going to stop Windermere from being poisoned, or save a single chalk stream in this country. We need to take a radical approach to this industry.

“As the only water company to have received an outstanding rating for our business plan for the third consecutive time, we have a track record of setting and delivering on stretching business plans. Consistently around 70% of the stretching regulatory deliverables have been met which put us top quartile compared to the sector.” – Susan Davy

Read Owl’s April post entitled “South West Water rewarded £6,7m for failure”. This exposes the only outstanding thing SWW excels in, is being the industry leader in writing creative future plans which it then fails to deliver.

Owl is waiting for Simon Jupp’s spin on all this.

South West Water owner makes huge loss after Brixham bug cost it £21m

Pennon sees losses widen and puts up bills

William Telford Business Editor www.devonlive.com

South West Water owner Pennon Group Ltd has made a £72.7m loss after a water bug made hundreds of people ill in Devon last year. The utilities giant saw losses widen from the £9.1m loss it made in [the previous year].

It put the blame for the loss on having to deal with the Cryptosporidium outbreak in Brixham in 2024, which left more than 100 people saying they were ill and some even going to hospital, and said the cost of “interventions to return quality supplies” cost it about £21m. It also said a company restructure cost it about £16.6m.

But the Exeter-based company, in its annual results for the year to the end of March 2025, said it expects to return to profitability in 2025/26 through increased revenue and a “reset of our cost base”. It also highlighted investment plans of £3.2bn.

South West Water customers saw bills jump by 28% on average from April, while bills for Bristol Water and Sutton and East Surrey (SES) customers, both companies being owned by Pennon, are going up by 5% and 3% respectively.

Susan Davy, group chief executive, said: “Pennon has delivered a resilient operational performance during a demanding year, while building a robust platform for the future. We have reshaped and reset the cost base, delivered record levels of capital investment and – following a successful rights issue – maintained a strong balance sheet.

“We are listening to our customers, who are quite rightly demanding water companies to do more for customers today and to step up investment for the future. We are doing both. We have worked diligently to help customers use less water and save more money with a range of campaigns and pilots.

“At the same time, our record year for investment has improved services that matter most to our customers. Whilst this has impacted profitability this year, it has been the right thing to do.

“As the only water company to have received an outstanding rating for our business plan for the third consecutive time, we have a track record of setting and delivering on stretching business plans. Consistently around 70% of the stretching regulatory deliverables have been met which put us top quartile compared to the sector.

“Of course there is more to do, not least on those measures we didn’t achieve, and our ambitious new plan includes a record £3.2bn of investment due to be completed by 2030. We know customers are worried about rising bills to fund this level of investment. While we have made the tough decision to put bills up in 2025/26 – for the first time in over a decade – two thirds of our investments are being funded by our supportive investors and debt providers.

“Ultimately everyone will benefit from the investments we are making – from building reservoirs, to fixing storm overflows, powering our net zero ambitions and helping to create economic growth. It’s why we’re able to make a £200m support package available to those who need it most.

“It’s also why – as the dry weather persists – we’re predicting that the South West won’t need a hosepipe ban this summer. We could not do this without the 4,000 brilliant colleagues who walk in our customers’ shoes every single day, focusing on the priorities that matter most for customers.”

This interim report is published today, following a total of 50,114 responses to the calls for evidence.

The following five areas come under scrutiny:

• Long term direction from government, including through the planning process.

• The creation of a simplified legislative framework, which could include new objectives around public health.

• Regulation but “a fundamental strengthening and rebalancing of Ofwat’s regulation is needed”, it is argued.

• Transparency and accountability within private water firms.

• The management of water industry assets, including pipework.

Note the terms of reference preclude any consideration of re-nationalisation.

Here is how the Chair Sir Jon Cunliffe summarises it in the Times:

“What has become increasingly clear as we have listened to the views — and heard the anger — on all sides of the debate is that there is no simple, single change, no matter how radical, that will deliver the safe, plentiful water and clean water environment that we need now and in the future.

We have heard of deep-rooted, systemic and interlocking failures — failure in government’s strategy and planning for the future, failure in regulation to protect both the bill payer and the environment and failure by many water companies and their owners to act in the public, as well as their private, interest. At the same time the demands on our water systems have grown.

On Wednesday, the commission is publishing an interim report setting out the direction of the fundamental changes we believe are necessary and show the scale of change required in how we plan, legislate, regulate and provide water, our most vital resource.

We have one set of water systems — our rivers, aquifers and coasts — but many different and often conflicting demands upon them. We want clean and healthy waterways and we need to manage the pressures from water companies, agriculture, industry, housing and others who all use our water. Setting the high-level priorities for water over the long term and balancing different objectives, including cost, is a job only government can do. It is not done effectively at present.

Our water systems are regional and need to be better managed at regional and local “catchment” level. Whether it’s how pollution sources are tackled, where new houses are built or how water shortages are addressed, the system is not working well and the local voice gets lost. Our conclusion is that stronger regional and local “system planning” is needed so decisions on a regional water system are made closer to its communities.

At the heart of public anger is the failure of the regulators to ensure that private water companies act in the public interest and the manifest failures of some companies to do so. Rebuilding trust will require a fundamental change in approach.

Akin to the “supervisory” approach seen in financial services, we believe Ofwat needs to depend far more on closer, more expert and judgment-based engagement with individual companies. A deeper understanding of their circumstances, finances and challenges will enable early intervention before issues arise. And it will inform price-setting to help poor performers improve and avoid the spiral of failure we have seen in some instances. Alongside this, we need a stronger voice in the system for consumers.

The capacity and capability of the environmental regulators falls a long way short of the public’s expectations for protection of our waterways. And environmental regulation has become too risk-averse and hesitant to enable innovative solutions that might deliver greater all-round environmental benefit. We need a more capable, intelligence-led regulator alongside legislative change to enable greater flexibility.

Beyond that, we need smarter as well as stronger regulators. Much friction, incoherence and cost in the system comes from the way regulators with very different remits interact. Radical streamlining and alignment of regulators is now essential.

In a system of private regulated water companies, effective regulation will always be the key line of defence for the public interest. But the ownership, governance and management of water companies can also have a big impact on whether companies deliver the public goods that society demands, which is why we are looking at these issues further.

The water industry should attract and retain owners and investors that are looking for low-risk and low return over the longer term and that are prepared to make the investment needed for the future. Achieving this will require restoring the confidence that has been lost in the predictability and stability of the regulatory system. We will make detailed recommendations in all of these areas in our final report later this summer.

“Resetting” our water sector is a problem not a puzzle. There is no single, simple answer. It will require a wide range of actions and sustained commitment. It will not happen overnight, but it can be done. And it needs to be done.”

More later

Cllr. Jess Bailey said it had been a “David and Goliath battle” with residents fighting the plans by a large company.

A controversial plan to create an industrial quarry on farmland in Devon has been shelved after 10 years of planning battles.

Miles Davis BBC Devon political reporter www.bbc.co.uk

Aggregate Industries wanted to build a quarry on the 100-acre Straitgate Farm site on the edge of Ottery St Mary to extract more than a million tonnes of sand and gravel.

Local councillor Jess Bailey said it had been a “David and Goliath battle” with residents fighting the plans by a large company.

Aggregate Industries, which rebranded to become Holcim UK earlier in 2025, said there had been “a change in business strategy and direction”.

‘Epic struggle’

The plans were refused by Devon County Council in December 2021 but an appeal to the Planning Inspector was successful in January 2023.

Bailey, independent member for Otter Valley, said it was “really quite unbelievable” that the plans advanced to the stage they reached.

She said: “It’s been an absolutely epic struggle, it’s gone on for years and years. It would have had a devastating impact on the local area.

“It’s been a huge David and Goliath battle where local community activists were campaigning against a multinational quarry company.

“It’s great news for our area and it’s just a shame it took such a long time to get to this point.”

Rupert Thistlethwayte is the owner of Cadhay House, an historic estate in Ottery St Mary.

He said the creation of the quarry could have harmed the water supply to medieval fishponds, external in the gardens of Cadhay House.

Responding to news of the plans being abandoned he said: “It’s absolutely fantastic and a great credit to all the people who were part of the action group.

“To keep their energy going for that length of time is astonishing. There were all sorts of lows and keeping going through those lows requires people with grit.”

Holcim UK said it had agreed to sell the Straitgate Farm site.

A spokesman for the firm said: “Following a change in business strategy and direction, which has included a review of the planned site, the company has decided not to proceed with quarrying at Straitgate.

“We have informed Devon County Council of this development and that we intend to allow the planning permission to lapse as a result.”

The company said it recognised the local community would “welcome the clarity and certainty this will bring”.

Council Leader Julian Brazil creates new role in cabinet, portfolio holder for rural affairs, and fills the post with Cllr Cheryl Cottle-Hunkin (Lib Dem, Torrington Rural), a famer herself.  

New rural affairs role at Devon County Council

Alison Stephenson, local democracy reporter www.radioexe.co.uk 

Innovation will be key to attracting government funding to help rural communities in Devon, according to the holder of a newly created role on Devon County Council’s cabinet.

First time county councillor Cheryl Cottle-Hunkin (Lib Dem, Torrington Rural) has been selected to be in charge of rural affairs and says she is looking globally to get the best for Devon.

“There are so many issues in rural areas, from access to health services and dentists and public transport, villages pubs and shops are struggling. And farmers feel they are being ignored by the government.

“But we can’t keep asking for money for the same things. We need to come up with new ideas and I am looking at what people are doing across the country and across the world in innovation.

“That is the way we will get central government funding.”

A Torridge District councillor of eight years for Shebbear and Langtree, Cllr Cottle-Hunkin spearheaded acampaign in Devon to try to save mobile libraries and was invited to Westminster to talk to MPs at a farmers’ rally in the capital against changes to inheritance tax.

A farmer herself, she said she understood the issues and is “honoured” to have been asked to join the cabinet.

“As someone who has grown up living in rural Devon, and at a time when farmers are going though hugely stressful times with new rules and moving goalposts, taking numerous blows from central government, I hope we can show that at county level we understand, and we will be your voice.

“We recognise the importance of Devon County Council’s own farms’ estate as well as the need to develop stronger partnerships locally.”

Cllr Cottle-Hunkin said she hoped people would no longer feel the county council was “Exeter-centric”.

“I think a lot of residents living outside of Exeter feel that rural issues have not been at the forefront of the council in the past. Rural isolation is a big challenge and I will be looking at how we can make lives better for the people in our rural communities as a whole.”

She said groups like Devon Communities Together had already been in touch and meetings set up.

“The role will evolve over time as it’s brand new,” she said.

“I am a big fan of the health hubs that have been created and would like to see more of that kind of thing.”

New leader of Devon County Council Julian Brazil (Lib Dem, Kingsbridge) said the authority would be “a loud voice for all things rural especially farming.

“I’m excited to be working with Cheryl. We wanted to establish a champion for rural affairs and Cheryl will be ideal. She instinctively understands the issues because she lives the life.”

The Lib Dems are now the largest party on the county council after the Conservatives lost overall control and secured just seven seats. Cllr Brazil said he wanted the authority to be inclusive where everyone has a voice.

Cllr Cottle-Hunkin has stepped down from her role as leader of the Lib Dem group on Torridge District Council to concentrate on county council work and will be succeeded by Cllr Teresa Tinsley (Bideford North).

Cllr Huw Thomas (Green, Bideford East) will take over Cllr Cottle-Hunkin’s role as chair of Torridge’s external overview and scrutiny committee.

She will continue to be lead member for culture and community engagement.