People who stay in Wales overnight, including children, are set to be charged a visitor levy under a scheme that could raise up to £33m a year to be ploughed back into tourism and culture.

Steven Morris www.theguardian.com 

All visitors would be charged 75p a night to stay in campsites and hostels and £1.25 for all other accommodation including hotels, B&Bs and holiday lets.

A bill giving local authorities the option to introduce the levy is being introduced on Monday by the Welsh government’s finance secretary, Mark Drakeford, though it would not come into force until 2027 at the earliest.

If all Welsh local authorities choose to introduce a levy, it is estimated it could generate up to £33m a year. It is expected that areas popular with visitors such as Gwynedd in the north, Pembrokeshire in the south-west and Cardiff may be keen to bring in the levy.

A statutory registration scheme for all accommodation providers is expected to start operating in 2026 to support the collection and administration. Local authorities who take part will have to produce an annual report setting out how much money is raised and how it is used.

Many tourist businesses in Wales have criticised the idea, arguing it will be an added burden to them and could put visitors off. The Tories in Wales have said it will create more red tape and cost jobs.

Rowland Rees-Evans, chair of the Wales Tourism Alliance, said: “What has been proposed will increase the costs for tourism and hospitality businesses, which will be passed on to our visitors, without any perceived added value.

[This was the Welsh government’s opportunity to deliver a gold standard in tourism and accommodation – setting Wales apart from the rest of the UK. Instead it has merely made Wales more expensive without any perceived added-value for our visitors.”

Describing the plans as “punitive”, the leader of the Welsh Tories, Andrew RT Davies, said: “During a cost-of-living crisis, only Labour could have come up with this grasping, penny-pinching policy.”

But the Labour-run Welsh government argues it has kept the scheme simple and businesses have plenty of time to prepare.

Drakeford said he expected the money raised to be used for initiatives such as keeping beaches clean, maintaining visitor centres, toilets and paths.

He told the Guardian: “We have small towns in Wales where a population of a few thousand in the winter becomes tens of thousands in the summer. And that inevitably does put pressure on local facilities, which at the moment have to be paid for entirely by that much smaller number of people who live permanently in that locality.”

The idea is for businesses to pass on costs to visitors but they could choose to absorb it. Drakeford said: “I think people will think of it as a simple act of fairness, that you make a very small contribution to the costs that would have been incurred as a result of you visiting that area.”

Local authorities will be able to use the money to boost Cymraeg, the Welsh language. Drakeford said: “In some parts of Wales, the language is the reason that people visit. People visit not just for the physical fabric of the place, but for the cultural component as well. You come to Wales, you are coming to a different place. And the language and the culture is part of what makes it attractive. Keeping the character of the area as well as the physical fabric is part of what local authorities would be able to use the money they would have collected to do.”

Drakeford said he did not believe the levy would make Wales seem unwelcoming. “This is something that is happening around the world. So I think we’re just at a slightly leading edge of a policy that will become very common indeed in future. We’ve not rushed at it. We’re doing it carefully. We’re trying to take the industry with us, give people plenty of time to prepare for it, because that way we can make it a success.”

There will be exceptions. Homeless people staying in holiday accommodation that has been arranged for them by local authorities will be exempt and people with disabilities travelling with a carer will be eligible for refunds.

People staying in holiday accommodation after an emergency, for example a flood, will not have to pay, not will anyone staying more than 31 nights. The bill is called the visitor accommodation (register and levy) etc. (Wales) bill.

In other Welsh political developments, the government has updated plans for its sustainable farming scheme – its post-Brexit plan for funding the industry – after its earlier version triggered protest from farmers.

One of the changes is that farmers will no longer be asked to have a minimum of 10% tree cover on their land. Instead, there will be a scheme-wide target for a tree-planting and hedgerow-creation opportunity plan. The details are still to be worked out.

The deputy first minister, Huw Irranca-Davies, said: “It was clear changes were needed – we said we would listen – and we’ve done just that.” The final decision on the scheme will be made next summer.

EDDC Leader Paul Arnott comments:  “the new government does not appear to know what it is doing and risks doing actual harm – in planning, water & sewage and devolution.” 

Owl recalls this Guardian editorial from 2016 – plus ça change!

Communities…. are reduced to scrabbling for a share of the Treasury’s parachute drop of cash to the city regions. Ministers may talk of a new era of municipal greatness, but it is a hollow sham as long as local authorities lack effective income-raising powers. Unless and until English devolution is reconceived as regions made up from existing counties, cities and boroughs, these arguments will continue, pitting community identity and democracy against economic inequalities and distortions enforced from Whitehall.

How many more decades do we have to wait?

The Guardian view on English local identities: a clash of cash against community

A court case about whether Chesterfield can leave Derbyshire to become part of Sheffield illuminates the inexorable wasting of English local government and identity

Is Derbyshire in the north of England or the Midlands? The question is as old as the redrawing of the map of England following the Norman conquest. But it is no longer such a parochial or academic question as it may seem. Derbyshire’s dilemmas now illuminate what we mean by local democracy and local government in England more generally. That’s because the promotion of English city regions and the money being directed towards the northern powerhouse by the Treasury in London are making a nonsense of historic local identities as well as of England’s long but increasingly derelict traditions of locally rooted democratic municipalism.

Just before Christmas, the high court backed an objection by Derbyshire county council against efforts by Chesterfield, which is in the north of the county, to attach itself to the emerging city region of Sheffield, which comprises Sheffield, Barnsley, Rotherham and Doncaster, which are all historically part of the various iterations of Yorkshire, its ridings and its more modern subdivisions.

The court did this after Derbyshire complained that if Chesterfield were permitted to redefine itself as part of Sheffield, it would raise the question of whether the county of Derbyshire could be said to exist at all without its second largest town. The county’s case was reinforced by the fact that Chesterfield district has no actual border with Sheffield, from which it is separated by part of the North East Derbyshire district. If Chesterfield were to join Sheffield, it would become an enclave (or, from Sheffield’s viewpoint, an exclave) within its former county. It would be the Nagorno-Karabakh of the east Midlands, leaving the map of Derbyshire resembling nothing so much as a Barbara Hepworth sculpture.

From a financial rather than an identity perspective, Chesterfield’s move makes a certain sort of sense. Faced with continuing financial pressures to cut, sell off or simply abandon swaths of local government services that have existed for generations, English local authorities inevitably clutch at any cash straws they can. The city regions are one of the few straws on offer. They are due to receive £30m in new funding a year and to acquire new freedoms to shape local transport, planning and economic policy.

It is hardly surprising that Chesterfield’s defection was hatched and promoted at the council level, since councillors and council officers are in the frontline of struggling with these austerity-driven realities every day. While the councils did their deal, Chesterfield and Derbyshire opinion was barely considered, the high court ruled, so it must now be properly consulted and taken into account before any decision is taken. An online poll organised by the county council in August, five months after Chesterfield decided to join Sheffield, found 92% of respondents opposed to the move.

That is almost certainly because, for all its proximity to Sheffield, there has never been any serious tradition of Chesterfield regarding itself as part of Greater Sheffield, or of Sheffield seeing Chesterfield as part of South Yorkshire. Chesterfield is today what it has always been, an important town in north-east Derbyshire, famous for the twisted spire of its St Mary’s church, and for having had Tony Benn as its MP in the later period of his parliamentary career. Its possible marriage to the Sheffield city region is overwhelmingly rooted in perceived economic advantage rather than in history or public sentiment. The high court has therefore pitted economic survival against identity and democracy.

The Chesterfield-Sheffield question is of far more than local interest. Local identity matters everywhere. It is tenacious. It runs deeper than the economic or administrative convenience of a bureaucrat’s pen. County identities are medieval in origin but they lurk on in many modern consciousnesses. Ministers mess with them at their peril.

The argument about Derbyshire has only arisen because English local government is in such a desperate state. Austerity in the 2010s is completing the centralisation of local powers begun in the 1980s. Communities like Chesterfield are reduced to scrabbling for a share of the Treasury’s parachute drop of cash to the city regions. Ministers may talk of a new era of municipal greatness, but it is a hollow sham as long as local authorities lack effective income-raising powers. Unless and until English devolution is reconceived as regions made up from existing counties, cities and boroughs, these arguments will continue, pitting community identity and democracy against economic inequalities and distortions enforced from Whitehall.

Guardian Editorial 28 December 2016

East Devon’s most vulnerable residents secured nearly £750,000 in benefits they weren’t claiming and reduced debt levels in just over four months.

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

Changes to the winter fuel allowance by the government have led to an increased workload for the organisation, with Citizens Advice East Devon boss Dean Stewart stating the first three months of the Labour administration being in power in Westminster had been “fairly busy”.

Mr Stewart told East Devon District Council’s poverty working panel that since July, his organisation had secured nearly three-quarters-of-a-million pounds for residents, either by identifying benefits they were eligible to receive but hadn’t applied for, or through reduced debt burdens.

The winter fuel allowance changes mean that these payments are no longer universal, and are only made to those on pension credit, or other means-tested benefits, such as working tax credit or universal credit.

Mr Stewart said that with just 17 people successfully securing pension credit, those individuals were now receiving a combined £45,000 extra income for the next year.

He added that the charity’s workload had increased as it sought to identify people who qualified for pension credit but were not receiving it, stating that of the 798 clients it saw between July and September, 49 were pension credit-related, with another 38 such cases since then.

The update came as East Devon’s own benefits team said it had phoned 221 households that it thought could be eligible for further benefits than they were claiming.

Sharon Church, a benefits manager at East Devon, said the authority had been making sure that anyone eligible for pension credit, housing benefit, or a council tax reduction, was applying for the benefits relevant to them.

“With rising energy prices, we know a number of pension-age residents will be worrying about heating this winter,” she said.

“If pension credit is awarded to them, then they will get the winter fuel allowance.”

Ms Church added the council had been working with the likes of town and district councils, as well as community groups, to help ensure the take-up of eligible benefits was as high as possible.

She noted that many residents had found the online form to apply for pension credit confusing, given it asks for weekly income rather than monthly.

And she highlighted many were giving up on the calls to the Department for Work and Pensions given waiting times were as long as 45 minutes, adding that some were also being given conflicting information, such as being told they are eligible for pension credit via the online calculator, but then told by phone they were ineligible.

Mr Stewart said that Citizens Advice could help people fill forms in if required.

Our railways here in Devon need investment.

On Tuesday of this week, MPs debated bringing passenger railway services into public ownership.

Richard Foord MP

I think I may share with many people who have written to me about this the following view: I don’t particularly care whether trains are run by the Government or by train operating companies; the main thing is that they run on time!

Late trains are great for business at some of the brilliant cafes, pubs and kitchens on our railway platforms (Axminster comes to mind).

Yet what travellers want above all is to get to their destination.

We have been seeing track upgrades near Honiton lately.

Network Rail has been replacing trains with buses between Axminster and Exeter St Davids for a couple of weeks now.

The trains will finally be running again this Saturday, 23rd November, which is a great relief to all of us for whom the phrase “rail replacement bus service” sends a shudder down the spine.

Of course, track maintenance has to take place.

Yet for those of us who rely on the train service to get to work, college, or a medical appointment, it’s inconvenient when we have to get on a coach, significantly increasing travel time during dark, wet mornings and evenings.

Some rail users in East Devon tell me that they are never quite sure if a train will turn up on time.

Often, the number of carriages is reduced, which means you can end up standing closer to your neighbour than you are comfortable with.

Good luck if you need the toilet on these journeys because it may be blocked by bodies wedged tightly together!

The railways here in the South West have been neglected for years.

The last Conservative government claimed in its dog days that it was cancelling HS2 in order that it might spend the money on other rail projects instead.

If that had been true, it would have been great.

Yet ministers had ploughed billions into HS2, which they later sensationally scrapped, wasting colossal sums of taxpayers’ money.

We could do with some of that money to create an additional loop in the Feniton area, which could improve punctuality on what is otherwise a single-track line.

I raised this with the Rail Minister last December.

I read of trains on the continent, which are clean, run on time, and on which you can be certain of getting a seat.

That description is a long way from the railway we have here.

I am monitoring Government actions following their pledge to improve the reliability of our railways—and I intend to hold them to it.

“My sincere worry…. [is] that on three things which really matter to a district leader the new government does not appear to know what it is doing and risks doing actual harm – in planning, water & sewage and devolution.”

“My old friends want the Labour Party to have more ambition”

Paul Arnott

I took the train up to London last week to celebrate forty years since my casual football team first played a game.

We used to play in something we co-founded called the Phene League, named after the pub in south-west London where we first met with ten other teams to organise fixtures.

Sitting in the Phene Arms bar that night was the late George Best, who was, as was his habit, genially drunk, an addiction which tragically cost him an early death.

Despite this maudlin backdrop, we hired the upper room of the pub.

Our skipper, my best friend, had found a few old photos in his attic, in which I, a free-scoring, slim, dark-haired striker appeared.

I am no longer any of those things, but it was that kind of evening, full of laughter but of course reflection.

When you enter your seventh decade, it turns out that friends who did not seem to have much promise in their early twenties are beginning to retire, some from pretty interesting careers.

Forty years ago, the last thing anyone would have wanted to discuss was government.

I’m not sure we would even have known what it was.

But a couple of them, to my astonishment, were more than happy to buttonhole me on the subject of devolution.

In short, the new government has signalled its resolute will to create huge mayoral authorities to follow the example of Manchester and the West Midlands.

And that the bigger the population, the better, and easier it will be to negotiate directly with the central government to fund the major infrastructure work we all know is needed nationwide.

Our left back had worked at the heart of New Labour all the way through to Gordon Brown’s downfall and is a successful businessman in his own right.

Labour is in his blood.

Our strolling central midfielder is now senior advisor to a proposed devolution deal in the Midlands, also Labour to the tips of his toes.

Huddled at the end of the table, the three of us chatted, and I offered my sincere worry that on three things which really matter to a district leader the new government does not appear to know what it is doing and risks doing actual harm – in planning, water & sewage and devolution.

The latter is because nobody seems to have a clue if Devon will end up in a mayoral unit with Cornwall when Cornwall is saying no thank you – loudly.

Or do we join with Somerset and Dorset instead, leaving the door open for Cornwall one day?

My Labour friends astonished me.

They openly said that the problem was that Keir Starmer was so focused on winning the election that he was not interested in policy.

Tony Blair Gordon Brown and the other big beasts had spent five years before winning in 1997 and came in with over 250 policies, only three of which they did not implement.

In these early months of Downing Street in 2024, they are having to conjure policy from thin air.

It shows.

By the end of this month, the devolution white paper is due.

I wish it well.

This will be a major moment for the new government, and from Devon’s perspective, I will be working with other leaders in districts and at the county to make sure we negotiate the best outcome for local people.

Let’s see.

Local authorities across the south west will have to ‘be bold’ in setting the tax they demand from people who buy second homes in the area, councillors have been told.

Guy Henderson, local democracy reporter www.radioexe.co.uk 

The proliferation of second homes and holiday lets in popular areas such as Teignbridge, the South Hams and Dartmoor is adding to the pressure on councils to provide more affordable homes for local people.

A number of councils have already voted to charge second home owners double the normal rate of council tax to help fund local services.

But members of the Teignbridge overview and scrutiny committee heard that more action could be needed to enable local people to find homes in their communities.

Cllr Sally Morgan (Lib Dem, Bovey) also serves on the Dartmoor National Park Authority, and delivered her regular report on its work.

On housing, she said the authority was ‘torn’ between looking after the landscape and providing homes.

“We recognise the need for affordable homes,” she said. “It is incredibly expensive to live on Dartmoor. There seems to be a premium to the name. If you want to charge 25 per cent more for your product, put the name ‘Dartmoor’ in front of it, and the same goes for houses.”

She said the pressure created by second homes and holiday lets made it difficult for people to farm on the moor. It could be hard to recruit staff, with workers unable to afford to live locally and having to commute from Newton Abbot or Teignmouth.

“It’s a conundrum,” said Cllr Morgan. “To some extent we have to be bold about how we charge council tax on holiday lets and second homes, and that’s a discussion we have to have across the south west, not just on Dartmoor.

“It’s a constant balance of community, farming and environment.”

Cllr Morgan also raised the alarm over budget pressures on the national park, which receives most of its funding from central government.

“Our reserves are there for a rainy day, and everyone has agreed that it’s tipping down,” she said. “We are not the only park in that situation.

“We can’t afford to be cut any more. We are down to the bone.”
 

The Devon town promised a sewage treatment plant – but given 2,000 hours of spills

Sewage has been dumped for nearly 2,000 hours near a new town in east Devon after South West Water (SWW) backtracked on its plan to build a treatment plant for it.

Kyriakos Petrakos inews.co.uk

SWW had set out plans to build a sewage plant for the new town of Cranbrook, where 3,200 homes have been built over the past 12 years. Instead, SWW opted to upgrade the Countess Wear plant located six miles away, diverting sewage there.

i‘s analysis of the latest Environment Agency (EA) data has found that sewage was dumped from the upgraded Countess Wear plant into the River Exe Estuary – an internationally recognised special protection area – for over 1,050 hours between 2020 and 2023.

Sewage was also discharged from the company’s Clyst Honiton plant – linked to both Cranbrook and Countess Wear – for an additional 935 hours during that period.

While wastewater treatment plants located within a 15-minute drive from Cranbrook and Countess Wear discharged raw sewage for a further 15,472 hours between 2020 and 2023, SWW claims that these spills are not the result of sewage from Cranbrook being processed at Countess Wear.

Residents across east Devon, including locals of the coastal town of Exmouth who are collectively taking SWW to court over water pollution, have condemned the company’s failure to build a new plant after their waterways were blighted by sewage spills.

“With all the problems that we have – and we know that they are related to a lack of infrastructure – it still hasn’t been built,” Exmouth resident and sea swimmer Jo Bateman said.

Ms Bateman, 62, is taking SWW to court over sea sewage discharges that she claims have harmed her health and prevented her from taking daily swims.

“It’s just shocking that they had planning permission to build it, said they would do it and haven’t done it,” she added. “It beggars belief.

“I’m not opposed to the building of new homes, but if you don’t build enough infrastructure to process the sewage, it will come out somewhere and that’s what’s happening.”

SWW has denied that treating sewage from Cranbrook at its Countess Wear site contributed to sewage spills in areas such as Exmouth and Clyst St Mary – a village that flooded with sewage 11 times in 2021 alone.

“Between 2010-2013, we carried out work and improvements on our network to significantly increase treatment capacity at Countess Wear sewage treatment works to support the development of Cranbrook,” a South West Water spokesperson said.

“We can confirm that we have the capacity to treat foul flows from Cranbrook at Countess Wear as there have been significantly less houses built than originally planned for.”

Despite backlash over the unbuilt Cranbrook plant, East Devon District Council (EDDC) plans to expand the new town and approved the development of nearly 2,500 more dwellings earlier this year.

The expansion forms part of its Cranbrook Plan, which was adopted in October 2022 and sets out how the town will eventually house a population of around 20,000.

New neighbourhood centres, schools, sports grounds, a cemetery and pitches for travellers will also be built under the plan.

An EDDC spokesperson told i that the council will “ensure that foul sewerage from the development is appropriately managed and that there is adequate capacity” to treat wastewater from Cranbrook’s expansion.

But the EA has raised concerns over the new development, claiming that “it is not clear which South West Water WwTW [wastewater treatment works] foul drainage will be directed to and whether additional infrastructure” will be necessary.

A SWW spokesperson said: “We are working with EDDC and the EA to understand the pace and scale of development at Cranbrook, which we understand will deliver new properties up to 2035.

“To address this anticipated demand, we are developing our plans to build a new wastewater treatment works by 2035, subject to regulatory approvals.

“This would ensure that the right treatment capacity is available to meet the needs of the wider Cranbrook plan and developments.”

EDDC is to build a separate new town with 8,000 dwellings in east Devon, despite 65 per cent of respondents to a public consultation opposing plans last year.

The council said that it will go ahead with its plans to build the new plan, overriding public opposition, to meet government housing targets.

But Simon Jupp, who was the MP for East Devon when the plans were approved, said councillors “very much jumped the gun to sign off a further new town of 8,000 homes in our district – just weeks before the new national planning policy framework was announced” by the previous Conservative government “which provides the tools to challenge such housing targets”.

He added that the decision was “spectacularly short-sighted and risks further challenges for the district’s water infrastructure”, calling on SWW “to draw up plans for a new plant, with urgency”.

An EDDC spokesperson said: “The previous government’s minor changes to the wording of national planning policy did not change the reality that the council must plan to meet the long-term future housing needs for East Devon through the production of local plans.

“After careful consideration of land available for development across the district over the next few decades, and the need to preserve the beauty of the East Devon and Blackdown Hills National Landscapes and the international importance of the Jurassic Coast World Heritage Site, it is proposed to allocate a significant amount of land outside these designated areas for a second new community, east of Clyst St Mary.

“This allocation will be included in the local plan when it is submitted in 2025 to the Secretary of State for examination.”

The Labour Government’s new Water (Special Measures) Bill will introduce harsher penalties for law-breaking wastewater firms, with executives who fail to cooperate or interfere with investigations facing prison sentences of up to two years.

Water firms will be required to publish near real-time information from storm overflow monitors within an hour of each sewage discharge.

The bill will also allow the EA to impose “severe penalties” more quickly, without needing to direct significant resources to lengthy investigations, for offences related to pollution.

Environment Secretary Steve Reed also announced last month that a new Independent Water Commission will be launched to deliver the “largest review of the sector since privatisation”.

i has contacted the EA for a comment.

A “one size fits all” approach to designating a river or beach as a bathing water is to end as part of water quality reforms in England and Wales.

Adam Vaughan www.thetimes.com 

In future the presence of users other than swimmers, for instance kayakers or paddleboarders, could be taken as evidence that a river or beach should become a bathing water.

Places that attract cold-water enthusiasts could also benefit. The government is proposing that water tests can be conducted at different times of the year, rather than just in summer.

“Bathing-water sites are the pride of local communities,” Emma Hardy, the water and flooding minister, said. “But the current system is not working for those who enjoy our bathing waters and reform is long overdue.”

New bathing waters are usually designated by officials who assess applications put forward by communities that are able to show a location is well used. The criteria include whether there are toilets nearby.

At present, officials working for the Environment Agency or Natural Resources Wales test water between May and September. Sites are then rated excellent, good, sufficient or poor. That last rating means the water does not meet the minimum standard and signs will be placed to deter swimmers.

The government’s proposals will mean that the most-polluted waterways, with run-off from industry or farms, are less likely to be named as bathing waters. Locations will only be considered if experts believe they can be improved to “sufficient”. The theory is that the change will avoid wasting money on attempted designation.

Bathing waters will not lose the designation if water quality is deemed poor for five years in a row. This recognises that it can take longer than five years to make changes, such as building infrastructure to curb sewage spills.

Another reform will recognise the popularity of all-year cold water swimming. If a location is used all year round then officials could work with local people to conduct tests outside the usual May to September period. The frequency of testing will not reduce.

Amy Fairman, of the campaign group River Action, said: “These are steps in the right direction, but the application process must be made much easier and water company permits must be reviewed to increase water quality standards or they will continue to pollute for profit.”

There are 650 designated bathing waters in England and Wales. Last year 66.4 per cent were rated excellent, 23.4 per cent good, 5.9 per cent sufficient and 4.3 per cent poor. Most of the locations are beaches — all those on rivers were rated poor. In February the Conservative government said more than 20 rivers were set to be named as bathing waters. Figures for this year are expected this month.

Officials gave no date for when reform could take effect. With only five months until the next bathing season begins, changes are unlikely to be introduced until at least 2026.

A busy East Devon rail line between Axminster and Exeter St David’s will close for a fortnight from Saturday, November 9, so track upgrades in the Honiton area can take place.

East Devon Reporter eastdevonnews.co.uk 

Busses will replace trains for commuters as part of the work which will see engineers install a mile of new track through Honiton Tunnel – replacing the existing 50-year-old infrastructure.

The upgrade includes the installation of new sleepers and ballast, ensuring ‘a smoother and more reliable journey for passengers,’ says Network Rail.

The West of England Line – which runs through Honiton, Feniton, Whimple, Cranbrook, Pinhoe and Exeter Central – is due to reopen on Saturday, November 23.

Network Rail will also complete other ‘essential tasks’ which include cutting back vegetation and removing dangerous, diseased and dying trees between Honiton and Pinhoe along with general track and drainage maintenance.

Water channelling away from the Honiton Tunnel will be enhanced to reduce the likelihood of flooding.

Half-a-mile of track between Pinhoe and Feniton will be replaced.

Earthworks will see the stabilisation of the recent Cleave Embankment landslip finished.

South Western Railway (SWR) will be running the following rail replacement bus services between Axminster and Exeter St David’s:

Weekdays:

• One per hour Axminster to Exeter St David’s – calling at Honiton, Cranbrook and Exeter Central;
• One per hour Axminster to Exeter St David’s – calling at Honiton, Feniton, Whimple, Cranbrook, Pinhoe and Exeter Central.

Weekends:

• One per hour Axminster to Exeter St David’s – calling at Honiton and Exeter Central;
• One per hour Axminster to Exeter St David’s – calling at Honiton, Feniton, Whimple, Cranbrook, Pinhoe and Exeter Central.

Mark Goodall, Wessex Route director, said: “There is never a convenient time to close the railway for an extended duration so we’re sorry to any passengers disrupted by this closure and thank them in advance for their patience and understanding.

“The West of England Line is a critical route for connecting passengers from Devon to London, and vice-versa, and this forthcoming work is really important for the continued safe and reliable running of train services.

“In particular, the track through Honiton Tunnel is now life expired and in need of replacing with new and more resilient track and while that is being completed our teams will be undertaking a number of other useful pieces of key maintenance and upgrades along the line to support us in running the best possible service we can when the line reopens on Saturday, November 23.”

Peter Williams, customer and commercial director for South Western Railway, added: “Customers travelling between Axminster and Exeter should check their journeys and allow extra time to complete them, as buses are replacing trains from Saturday 9 to Friday, November 22.

“Closing important parts of the railway for two weeks is never an easy decision because we know how inconvenient it can be for customers, but the closure will allow Network Rail to deliver significant improvements on this part of the West of England line.

“We thank customers for their patience as these essential improvements are carried out, which will boost performance for years to come and help avoid day-to-day disruption on this busy part of our network.”

East Devon District Council may have to borrow £1 million less than initially expected for social housing.

It’s still going to need a large sum. Overspending last year and dipping into reserves meant it thought it would have to borrow around £9.2 million to balance social housing finances this year.

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

But the council’s housing review board has been told that it should only need to borrow around £8 million for its capital programme – money spent on things such as repairs.

Its finances have been helped by more funding being received than expected, and higher interest income.

But it does also now need to spend more money than anticipated.

A £13.3 million budget has risen 15 per cent to £15.3 million.

Around £600,000 needs to be spent on repairs and ‘complaint works’ and £300,000 on social service adaptations, such as installing wet rooms and extensions.

But the council is currently earning more income from social housing than expected, partly because of high levels of rent collection and a fewer empty properties.

East Devon has 4,127 social properties, with 73 void empty at the end of September – equivalent to less than two per cent of its stock. This had dropped further to just 54 properties this month.
 

• Agricultural storage building Curlew Farm Trinity Hill Road Combpyne Axminster EX13 8SZRef. No: 24/2259/AGR | Validated: Fri 25 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Non-material amendment to 15/2902/MRES : Changes to the allotments to introduce steps, reduce the number of planters to improve accessibility, remove one allotment and add a picnic bench, amend access to the orchard and change the vehicular gate from a single gate to double gates. Old Park Farm Two West Clyst ExeterRef. No: 24/2258/NMA | Validated: Fri 25 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Discharge of condition 7 for 24/0331/MFUL : Condition 7 (Ground investigation) Land North And South Of Station Road, Warwick Close, Wells Avenue, Land Opposite Greenacres Close And Land Adjacent To Ottery Road Near Sidmouth Junction Sewage Pumping Station FenitonRef. No: 24/2257/DOC | Validated: Fri 25 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Proposed garage conversion and first floor extension above. 6 Glenview Honiton Devon EX14 2NTRef. No: 24/2256/FUL | Validated: Fri 25 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Discharge of conditions for 23/0842/FUL: Condition 3 (Schedule of Materials (External Finishes), Conditon 5 (Schedule of Materials (Windows & Doors), Condition 6 (Schedule of Materials (Rooflights), Condition 7 (Schedule of Materials (Rainwater Goods), Condition 13 (CEMP), Condition 15 (Natural England Bat License), Condition 17 (Drainage Statement) and Condition 18 (Levels) Land And Buildings At Barton Farm Village Way AylesbeareRef. No: 24/2254/DOC | Validated: Fri 25 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• T1, Beech : reduce canopy height to leave a 5m minimum high tree, MDC 80mm. Reduce canopy spread to leave an even and balanced shape. 4 Bretteville Close Woodbury Exeter EX5 1JQRef. No: 24/2246/TRE | Validated: Fri 25 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Non-material amendment to 17/1019/MOUT: Amend the wording of Condition 5 (Framework Plan and Appearance Palette). Land North Of Old Tithebarn Lane Clyst HonitonRef. No: 24/2243/NMA | Validated: Thu 24 Oct 2024 | Status: Unknown
• Minor amendment for 14/0330/MOUT : Add upper limit parameters for the employment and commercial/community land Goodmores Farm Hulham Road Exmouth EX8 5BARef. No: 24/2242/NMA | Validated: Thu 24 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Alterations to existing garage roof 3 Inner Broomfield London Road Rockbeare Exeter EX5 2EBRef. No: 24/2239/FUL | Validated: Wed 23 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Yew: reduce the crown by approximately 2.5m with maximum diameter cuts of less than 70mm to achieve less than a 30% crown reduction; maintain a clearance of 0.5m from telecommunications line and 0.8m around power cable. May House Musbury Axminster EX13 8ARRef. No: 24/2238/TRE | Validated: Wed 23 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Removal of existing patio door to existing bedroom, infilling of opening to form a window aperture with masonry construction, and installation of new matching window. Amberwood Nursing Home 231 Exeter Road Exmouth EX8 3EDRef. No: 24/2237/FUL | Validated: Wed 23 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Holm Oak: fell. 16 Old Home Farm Rousdon Lyme Regis DT7 3YLRef. No: 24/2240/TCA | Validated: Wed 23 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Proposed extension and first floor conversion to garage building Old School House School Lane Exmouth EX8 3APRef. No: 24/2228/FUL | Validated: Tue 22 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Discharge of Condition for 24/1645/FUL: Condition 4 (cladding) and Condition 5 (roof tile) 10 Bishop Court Colyton EX24 6RQRef. No: 24/2231/DOC | Validated: Wed 23 Oct 2024 | Status: Unknown
• Discharge of Condition for 24/1401/FUL: Condition 4 (tree protection) Little Acre Woodbury Lane Axminster Devon EX13 5TLRef. No: 24/2230/DOC | Validated: Tue 22 Oct 2024 | Status: Unknown
• Portal frame dual pitch agricultural building Kingsdown Farm Salcombe Regis Sidmouth EX10 0PDRef. No: 24/2221/AGR | Validated: Mon 21 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Discharge of condition for 24/0139/FUL: Condition 5 (lighting). Kenwood Woodhouse Hill Uplyme DT7 3SLRef. No: 24/2213/DOC | Validated: Mon 21 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Discharge of conditions for 08/2365/LBC : Condition 5 (roofing materials) Starrs Dairy Sowton Exeter EX5 2AERef. No: 24/2232/DOC | Validated: Mon 21 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Discharge of condition for 24/0230/LBC: Condition3 (Archaeology) Halls Farm Metcombe Ottery St Mary EX11 1SSRef. No: 24/2219/DOC | Validated: Mon 21 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Minor amendment for application 23/1762/FUL: Alteration to approved style of roof and dimensions of porch 4 Pikes Cottages Church Road Colaton Raleigh Sidmouth EX10 0LLRef. No: 24/2214/NMA | Validated: Mon 21 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Pyrocantha hedge – hard trim.5 Kingsholme Colyford EX24 6RJRef. No: 24/2218/TCA | Validated: Mon 21 Oct 2024 | Status: Withdrawn
• Discharge of Condition for 24/1095/FUL: Condition 3 (Tree Protection) and Condition 4 (Surface Water/Drainage) Hillcrest Woodhouse Hill Uplyme Lyme Regis DT7 3SLRef. No: 24/2216/DOC | Validated: Mon 21 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Ash 200 – fell. Ash 310 – fell. Shute Barton Shute Axminster EX13 7PTRef. No: 24/2207/TRE | Validated: Mon 21 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Discharge of condition for 24/0271/LBC: Condition 3 Barn East Of Hooperhayne Colyton EX24 6SHRef. No: 24/2209/DOC | Validated: Mon 21 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Walnut – prune back the tips of 3 branches by approximately 1m to give adequate clearance to the building. Remove the growth from the wound of propped branch. Great Seaside Farm Branscombe Seaton EX12 3DPRef. No: 24/2211/TRE | Validated: Mon 21 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Roofing over livestock yard phase 2 Thorndene Farway Colyton EX24 6DGRef. No: 24/2172/FUL | Validated: Wed 23 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• First floor extension to the rear of the property. 24 Oakbeer Orchard Cranbrook Exeter EX5 7BLRef. No: 24/2152/FUL | Validated: Mon 21 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Temporary agricultural workers dwelling Land At HarpfordRef. No: 24/2123/FUL | Validated: Mon 21 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Demolition of existing house and outbuildings; construction of three new sheltered accommodation residential units (Almshouses) 4 East Budleigh Road Budleigh Salterton EX9 6HFRef. No: 24/2113/FUL | Validated: Wed 23 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Roofing over livestock yard phase 1 Thorndene Farway Devon EX24 6DGRef. No: 24/2108/FUL | Validated: Wed 23 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Proposed floodlighting scheme to the approved MUGA Ingrams Sports Pavilion London Road Cranbrook Exeter Devon EX5 7LFRef. No: 24/2112/FUL | Validated: Tue 22 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Construction of a part above ground fish pond, with pergola over and adjacent bike store housing pond filter equipment; Construction of 2no. driveway gate pillars 47 Clyst Valley Road Clyst St Mary Devon EX5 1DDRef. No: 24/2099/FUL | Validated: Fri 25 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Convert bedroom 5 into a shower room and hall with additional partition wall; rooflight on rear elevation and extraction fan on rear 10 Bicton Place Exmouth EX8 2SURef. No: 24/2098/LBC | Validated: Fri 25 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Alterations and extensions to the existing property to include a single storey extension (to the west) with terrace over; a two storey extension (to the north); a two storey extension (to the south); and the replacement of the pitched garage roof with a flat roof. 7 Northview Road Budleigh Salterton EX9 6BZRef. No: 24/2092/FUL | Validated: Wed 23 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• A storage shed to be used for agricultural machinery and fodder. Barn Hayes Field HuxhamRef. No: 24/2073/FUL | Validated: Tue 22 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Change of use from sheltered housing (Class C2) to form 9 No. apartments (Class C3) with associated operational development comprising: new fenestration; addition of 2 No. external balconies to 2nd and 3rd floor levels; re-application of external render; and external landscaping works. Abbeyfield Court Station Road Sidmouth EX10 8NWRef. No: 24/2023/FUL | Validated: Tue 22 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Single storey rear extension / side extension, first floor side extension, outbuilding, garage and parking space, roof lights to the existing roof space. 13 Park Way Exmouth EX8 3QGRef. No: 24/1988/FUL | Validated: Wed 23 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Installation externally of 3no. non-illuminated signs Hartgrove Hill Farm Trinity Hill Road Musbury Axminster EX13 8TBRef. No: 24/1952/ADV | Validated: Mon 21 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Single storey rear extension to the south elevation Oaklands Gerway Lane Ottery St Mary EX11 1PWRef. No: 24/1918/FUL | Validated: Fri 25 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Proposed construction of detached garage Virtues Vineyard Southleigh EX24 6JARef. No: 24/1727/FUL | Validated: Tue 22 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Second floor extension to the rear of the existing property 6 Henrietta Place Exmouth EX8 1LDRef. No: 24/1681/FUL | Validated: Mon 21 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Demolition of existing garage, construction of side extension to provide garage and mezzanine accommodation Fairview Littledown Lane Newton Poppleford Devon EX10 0BGRef. No: 24/0622/FUL | Validated: Fri 25 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision

A decade of planning rules designed to create housing connected to public transport routes has achieved nothing, a report has found, with millions of people in new homes still dependent on cars to get to local amenities.

Peter Walker www.theguardian.com 

The study by the Royal Town Planning Institute (RTPI) looked at more than 1.6m homes given planning permission in England from 2012 to 2021, finding that while major housing developments are supposed to be designed around transport infrastructure, this has not happened.

On average, across all the developments studied, it was twice as fast to reach the nearest hospital by car than public transport.

For other amenities such as schools, GPs, employment centres and town centres, car travel was 1.5 times as quick. There had been virtually no progress across the decade, the study found.

The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), which governs planning decisions across England, is explicit that new developments should be located to prioritise easy use of public transport, or walking and cycling, with sites chosen to help this.

The RTPI is calling on ministers to look at what changes can be made as part of the consultation process about the revised NPPF, which aims to create 1.5m new homes during this parliament.

The report, compiled with data from LandTech, a property information company, found that cycling came closest in convenience to a car, taking on average 1.3 times as long to reach such destinations, while noting that this was not an option available to everyone.

While there were significant differences between regions, even in London it still took on average 1.3 times as long to reach major destinations by public transport than in a car.

Across England as a whole, 96% of the new homes studied were no more than 20 minutes’ drive from a town centre, but this was only 66% for a 20-minute trip on public transport and 47% for a walk of the same distance.

Victoria Hills, RTPI chief executive, said: “It is essential that planning policies truly serve communities by creating environments that support health and sustainability. Planning should work for the people it impacts, ensuring communities flourish in healthy, well-connected places.

“To avoid repeating the mistakes of the past decade, the new NPPF must prioritise housing development in areas that reduce car reliance, bridge regional accessibility gaps, and support genuinely sustainable, vibrant communities. The time for policymakers to act is now.”

Among its recommendations, the report suggests more investment in public transport; seeking to release development sites closer to existing transport infrastructure such as train stations; and disincentives for driving such as higher parking fees.

The proposed new NPPF has already been criticised by some councils for imposing targets for new housing, which they say are completely unrealistic for their area, both in terms of what can be built and, in some cases, the amount of homes needed.

A Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government spokesperson said: “New homes must serve the needs of their communities and through our proposed NPPF we will create more opportunities for walking, cycling and public transport.

“Alongside our planning reforms we will work closely with councils, developers and local communities to deliver more sustainable transport links and infrastructure to support new housing.”

Cranbrook sign (image courtesy: Daniel Clark/LDRS)

EDDC says it was put up without planning permission

www.radioexe.co.uk

A construction firm in an East Devon town is being asked to remove a building it installed.

Taylor Wimpey’s sales centre, which was recently installed in Cranbrook town centre has been given a notice that requires the permanent removal of the building.

The enforcement notice requires that the building is removed and that the site is returned to its former condition within 3 months.

Cllr Todd Olive, East Devon District Council’s Portfolio Holder for Strategic Planning, said:

“We are acutely aware that the residents of Cranbrook want to see a vibrant town centre that includes a range of facilities.  We also know that residents want to see a better balance between the emphasis placed on house sales by the developers and the provision of community infrastructure. 

We want to see further shops coming forward at this prominent high street location.  It is deeply frustrating that Taylor Wimpey chose to go ahead with the installation of their sales centre that will block this objective. 

These works were undertaken without planning permission.  The developers were advised before going ahead that planning permission was required and that the proposed site would be unsuitable.

The Council acted swiftly to write to the developer requesting that the building and associated flags and signage were removed by the 25th October.  This was not complied with and the issuing of the enforcement notice represents the beginning of formal action. 

The future of Cranbrook town centre is of critical importance for the success of the growing community.  The Cranbrook Plan anticipates a vibrant, self-supporting town centre that includes a range of uses and activities to draw people in.   With the imminent completion of the supermarket, high street shops and children’s nursery, the town centre is now starting to take shape.  The Council will also shortly be considering a masterplan for the ongoing development to the town centre.”

Chairman of Cranbrook Town Council, Cllr Les Bayliss, added:

“Cranbrook Town Council agrees with East Devon District Council and supports the action that they have taken.”
 

Thousands of tonnes of earth crashed to the ground at the end of last week just under Peak Hill leaving one of Sidmouth’s magnificent properties teetering on the brink. 

Cliff path diversions have been put in place.

Only now are photographs emerging today in National Newspapers showing the true scale of the fall.

Is Labour, at heart, an urban party? – Owl

The environment secretary has caused a backlash among groups demanding an end to the pollution of rivers by water companies after a direct appeal ahead of a demonstration backfired. The intervention by Steve Reed, who wrote to activists saying they could trust him with forging change within the water industry, was met with anger by campaigners who said he was avoiding the key issue – that water privatisation has failed.

Sandra Laville www.theguardian.com 

In his letter to members from the 130 groups taking part in the March for Clean Water on Sunday, who include Surfers Against Sewage, the GMB union, the Wildlife Trusts and the RSPB, Reed said he shared their anger about record levels of sewage pollution. He wished them a well-attended march and said he looked forward to working with them towards a shared ambition of cleaning up rivers, lakes and seas for good.

But since Labour took power, Reed has ruled out what many who will take to the streets are calling for: the return of the water industry to some kind of public ownership. In making the decision to rule out public ownership, using existing powers available to him under the special administration regime, he was accused of relying on flawed analysis paid for by water companies.

In the letter, distributed by the march organisers River Action, Reed said the independent commission he set up, along with the water (special measures) bill going through parliament, would start the change needed in the sector.

Some campaigners criticised Reed’s attempt to claim allegiance, saying he had failed to address deep-rooted problems in the privatised water industry in England, where ownership has become concentrated in a web of private equity, foreign investment and pension funds.

Becky Malby, of Ilkley Clean River Group, said Reed should use his existing powers to take failing water companies into special administration. She said the public would not tolerate paying increasingly large bills to companies that remained under criminal investigation by the Environment Agency for suspected illegal sewage dumping and the financial regulator Ofwat.

Ash Smith, of Windrush against Sewage pollution, who is scheduled to speak on Sunday, said attempts to win over the marchers would not wash. “Steve Reed is trying to own the march by supporting clean water,” said Smith. “But there is massive public support to end the scandal that privatisation has brought. His refusal to face the facts and to rely on water company-funded fiction about costs is setting captive bill payers up to bail out private equity and keep the unforgivable exploitation going on for another five years.”

River Action said it had concerns about Reed’s repeated references to the need to promote economic growth within the sector. “Our polluted water bodies do not need economic growth,” a spokesperson said. “They need effective and uncompromising environmental protection and regulation. As we can see with recent developments at Thames Water, the financial model of the water industry is unravelling fast and in some cases broken beyond repair.”

Matt Staniek, of Save Windermere, said Reed’s intervention was a weak attempt to pacify public anger. “The government is clearly failing to enforce existing laws and continues to allow private equity to profit at the expense of bill payers and the environment,” he said. “They are proposing measures that fail to address the core issue – that privatisation has failed.”

A Defra spokesperson said: “We share the public’s concern about the health of our waterways, and it is encouraging to see so many people actively engaged in this important cause. This government is committed to cleaning up our rivers, lakes and seas and has wasted no time in acting.”

The spokesperson added that the new bill would hold companies to account and ensure they met the high standards the public rightfully expected. “This includes strengthening regulation to ensure water bosses face personal criminal liability for lawbreaking, and giving the water regulator new powers to ban the payment of bonuses if environmental standards are not met,” they said.

Owl – speechless!

The government’s new Value for Money chief has headed up several big projects that went massively over-budget.

Jennifer McKiernan www.bbc.co.uk

David Goldstone has previously worked as a top executive on the London Olympics, Parliament’s restoration and HS2 high speed rail.

He will now head up the government’s new Office for Value for Money (OfVM), external, advising Chancellor Rachel Reeves on “how to root out waste and inefficiency”, according to the Treasury.

Downing Street defended his appointment, saying Mr Goldstone is a “highly experienced public sector leader” with a “track record of working on complex high-value programmes”.

Asked if he represented value for money, a Number 10 spokeswoman said “yes”.

Reeves announced his appointment saying it’s “vital that we are driving efficiency and reducing wasteful spending” and his role would “help us realise the benefits from every pound of public spending”.

However, responding to the Budget on Wednesday, Reform UK leader and Clacton MP Nigel Farage said Mr Goldstone had “served for many years on the board of HS2, which I would suggest is the very opposite of value for money”.

The resurrected high speed rail project, HS2, had an initial budget of £38bn in 2009, but is now expected to cost at least double that.

Mr Goldstone’s LinkedIn page lists a position on the HS2 board from January to June 2012 and again from 2024, where he is a Treasury nominee, although he does not appear to have been in post in the intervening years.

He was the finance and programme director of the  Government Olympic Executive, delivering the 2012 London Olympics that cost three times as much as expected, coming in at £9bn.

Mr Goldstone was also chief executive of the Houses of Parliament Restoration and Renewal project and was mauled by MPs last year for receiving a £168,000 bonus, external, despite delays costing about £100m a year in maintenance costs.

Speaking to LBC, Conservative leadership hopeful Kemi Badenoch said there should not be a need for an office to determine value for money.

She said: “We are constantly trying to solve problems with more quangos, more bureaucrats, more politicians. This is not how you deliver growth.

“We should be able to determine value for money within the civil service itself.

“If they cannot do that, then I have no confidence that an Office for Value for Money will know how to do that either – that expertise should already be in the Treasury.”

The OfVM will have a team of 20 civil servants working under Mr Goldstone, who is expected to stay in post for one year, with the “possibility of extension”, according to the Treasury.

Mr Goldstone’s salary is understood to be about £950 per day for an average of one day a week’s work – a total salary of roughly £50,000 a year.

When it was put to Treasury minister Darren Jones that the OfVM salary would be worth £250,000 if he were full-time – significantly more than the prime minister is paid – he told LBC the “rate of return for the improvements… will be far, far greater”.

Jones added: “We can’t expect people to work for free.

“Actually, the day rate for David is, on a benchmark basis, competitive.”

The Treasury has been contacted for comment.

• Modern steel portal frame building providing clear span space for storage of hay, machinery, and equipment. The Oaks Aylesbeare Exeter EX5 2DERef. No: 24/2212/AGR | Validated: Fri 18 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• T1, Copper Beech: crown thinning, removing up to 20% of the foliar area to allow dappled light through the canopy; to also reduce extended vertical leaders to tie in with the main canopy, as per annotated photograph attached, removing up to 3m branch ends and making target pruning cuts of up to 40mm. The Gables West Hill Road West Hill Ottery St Mary EX11 1UZRef. No: 24/2203/TRE | Validated: Thu 17 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Discharge of Condition for 17/1019/MOUT: Condition 35 (Roads, Sewers, Drains, Surface Water etc) in relation to Phase 3 (ref. 22/2000/MRES) Land North Of Old Tithebarn Lane Clyst HonitonRef. No: 24/2198/DOC | Validated: Fri 18 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• County matter application for Variation of Conditions 1, 22 and 24 of planning permission DCC/4206/2020 (Application for determination of conditions under first periodic review) to extend the end date of mineral extraction and restoration and submission dates for restoration and aftercare schemes.Uplyme Quarry (Shapwick Quarry) Uplyme Lyme Regis DT7 3SPRef. No: 24/2195/CM | Validated: Wed 16 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Monkey Puzzle tree – fell and remove. Rosehill 30 West Hill Budleigh Salterton Devon EX9 6BURef. No: 24/2173/TCA | Validated: Thu 17 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Discharge of condition for 24/0816/LBC: Condition 4(Fireplace), Condition 5 (Repairs), Condition 6 (Windows & Doors) and Condition 7 (Doors) Barton House Church Hill Otterton Devon EX9 7HURef. No: 24/2182/DOC | Validated: Thu 17 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• T1, Oak: 1.5-2m tip reduction to the west mid canopy limb. T2, Ash: fell. T3, Hornbeam: 1m crown reduction. T4, Oak: 1.5-2m crown reduction on the west. Cranford Beeches Harcombe Road Axminster Devon EX13 5TBRef. No: 24/2180/TRE | Validated: Thu 17 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Lime – re-pollard to previous pruning points. The Coach House The Croft New Road Beer EX12 3HSRef. No: 24/2192/TCA | Validated: Thu 17 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• T1, Oak : 10-15% crown reduction via thinning. Maximum diameter of cuts, 60-70mm. Hamilton Lodge Colyford Road Seaton Devon EX12 2SNRef. No: 24/2176/TRE | Validated: Thu 17 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Certificate of Proposed Lawful Development to alter the existing external opening and form new opening and create internal shower room.Maryland 2A Mayfield Drive Exmouth EX8 2HDRef. No: 24/2178/CPL | Validated: Wed 16 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Construction of a detached triple garage with dependent relative’s accommodation above Apple Tree Farm Broadhembury Honiton EX14 3JZRef. No: 24/2177/FUL | Validated: Wed 16 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Proposed single storey extension and alterations to dwelling and conversion of outbuilding to form annexe Summers Barn Payhembury Honiton EX14 3HJRef. No: 24/2170/FUL | Validated: Wed 16 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Rear extension to existing annex, glazing to external walkway between annexe and main dwelling; repairs and protective measures have been proposed including, replacing concrete render with lime render, replacing gypsum plaster with lime plaster, thermal improvements, stair remodelling and chimney and roof structure repairs; flood protection measures including a raised boundary edge, door replacements and improvements, drainage amendments and drainage channels Ebford Cottage Lower Lane Ebford Exeter EX3 0QTRef. No: 24/2189/LBC | Validated: Wed 16 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Rear extension to existing annex, glazing to external walkway between annexe and main dwelling; replacing concrete render with lime render, and flood protection measures Ebford Cottage Lower Lane Ebford Exeter EX3 0QTRef. No: 24/2188/FUL | Validated: Wed 16 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Minor amendment for application 24/1256/FUL: Alteration to fenestration 5 Oaktree Close Exmouth EX8 4QLRef. No: 24/2183/NMA | Validated: Wed 16 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• T1, Oak: reduce lateral spread via thinning by up to 3m, maximum diameter of cut (MDC) 75mm; crown lift to 3m above ground level, MDC 50mm; remove major hazardous deadwood. T2, Western Red Cedar: crown reduce by, height 3m, MDC 50mm; west aspect by 2.5m, MDC 50mm; south aspect by 2.5m, MDC 2 @ 75mm, rest @ 25mm; east aspect by 1.5m, MDC 50mm and north aspect by 2.5m, MDC 50mm; crown lift to 3m above ground level, pruning low limbs back to source on parent stems, MDC 75mm. 68 Clyst Valley Road Clyst St Mary Devon EX5 1DERef. No: 24/2181/TRE | Validated: Wed 16 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Two storey side extension and single story front extension following demolition of detached garage and rear conservatory. 25 Hazeldene Gardens Exmouth EX8 3JARef. No: 24/2179/FUL | Validated: Wed 16 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• County matter application for Removal of Condition 28 and Variation of Condition 29 of planning permission DCC/4205/2020 (Extension of Uplyme Quarry) to amend the submission date of the Phase 1 Restoration Scheme.Uplyme Quarry (Shapwick Quarry) Uplyme Lyme Regis DT7 3SPRef. No: 24/2196/CM | Validated: Wed 16 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Prior notification for a proposed change of use from agricultural shed to class C1 (guesthouse) North Mill Dairy Membury Axminster EX13 7TNRef. No: 24/2187/PDR | Validated: Wed 16 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Certificate of Lawfulness to demolish the former dairy building and return the area to garden curtilageSite Of Till House London Road BroadclystRef. No: 24/2185/CPL | Validated: Wed 16 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• T1, Sycamore: removal. T2, Holly: reduce by 1200mm. T3, Hawthorn: removal. T4, Acacia: fell, leaving 1m tall stump. 11 Cranford Sidmouth Devon EX10 8UTRef. No: 24/2166/TCA | Validated: Tue 15 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Replacement of existing garage Marley Hayes Cottage Marley Hayes Exmouth EX8 5DHRef. No: 24/2159/FUL | Validated: Tue 15 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• New replacement single storey side extension and new balcony terrace with alterations to fenestration. Lyonesse 12 Fore Street Hill Budleigh Salterton EX9 6PERef. No: 24/2167/FUL | Validated: Tue 15 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Rear single storey extension to replace existing extension and conservatory. 40 Primley Road Sidmouth EX10 9LFRef. No: 24/2162/FUL | Validated: Tue 15 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Lawful development certificate for construction of outbuilding (Permitted Development Class E)10 Marine Parade Budleigh Salterton EX9 6NSRef. No: 24/2164/CPL | Validated: Tue 15 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Discharge of Conditions for 21/1348/FUL: Condition 3 (Materials), Condition 4 (Landscaping) 28 Cranford Avenue Exmouth Devon EX8 2PZRef. No: 24/2160/DOC | Validated: Tue 15 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• EIA screening opinion for the construction of a 100MW/250MWh Battery Energy Storage System (BESS) and associated infrastructure Land East Of Substation (Exeter Battery Storage) BroadclystRef. No: 24/0007/EIA | Validated: Tue 15 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Discharge of condition for 23/2349/FUL: Condition 3 (Material samples), Condition 6 (Landscaping scheme) and Condition 16 (sound insulation). Lower Stone Cottage Blackhorse Devon EX5 2APRef. No: 24/2165/DOC | Validated: Wed 16 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• 1, Ash: fell (Ash die-back). 2, Ash: fell (Ash die-back). 3, Ash: fell (Ash die-back). 4, Oak: fell. Rooks Acre Rousdon Devon DT7 3XRRef. No: 24/2158/TCA | Validated: Wed 16 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Discharge of conditions for 22/2631/FUL: Condition 1 (Time), Condition 2 (Plans condition), Condition 3 (Written scheme of investigation), Condition 4 (post investigation assessment), Condition 5 (schedule) Land Rear Of 5 Flightway Business Park Dunkeswell EX14 4RDRef. No: 24/2149/DOC | Validated: Mon 14 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• T1: Variegated Maple – remove branches that have reverted to being unvariegated. Reduce by approximately 1-1.5m to clear overhanging branches from neighbours garden and shape. 3 Watering Court Fore Street Otterton Devon EX9 7HBRef. No: 24/2155/TCA | Validated: Mon 14 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• T1, Cherry : fell – unwanted self sown seedling. T2, Bay : reduce by approximately 1m and trim side growth – continued management. 22 Woodlands Budleigh Salterton EX9 6ATRef. No: 24/2145/TRE | Validated: Mon 14 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Construction of a three bay garage and first floor annex extension with balcony. Four Winds Ebford Exeter EX3 0PARef. No: 24/2135/FUL | Validated: Fri 18 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Discharge of condition for 24/0604/FUL: Condition 4 (Materials) Upham Farm Farringdon Exeter EX5 2HZRef. No: 24/2137/DOC | Validated: Mon 14 Oct 2024 | Status: Unknown
• Discharge of condition for 20/1001/MOUT: Condition 14 (Works to be carried out) Winslade Park Clyst St Mary EX5 1DARef. No: 24/2141/DOC | Validated: Mon 14 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Erection of porch to front elevation of property 8 Grindle Way Clyst St Mary EX5 1DFRef. No: 24/2131/FUL | Validated: Wed 16 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• T1: Birch – lift lower branches to give 2.5m clearance over footpath and reduce crown by approximately 0.5m to a suitable pruning position. T2: Oleaster – crown reduce by 1.5m and re-shape to leave a natural form. G1: x2 Birch – reduce height by approximately 2m and re-shape. G2: row of Bay – reduce overhang by 1m and re-shape. T3: Bay – reduce by approximately 5m and re-shape. T4: Corkscrew Willow (dead) – fell. T5: Liquidambar – lift to 2m and shorten long branches on crown by 0.5m to a suitable pruning position. 3 Station Road Budleigh Salterton EX9 6RJRef. No: 24/2119/TCA | Validated: Thu 17 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Construction of two storey workshop/garage Sunningdale Buckerell Devon EX14 3ERRef. No: 24/2111/FUL | Validated: Tue 15 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Copper Beech – crown reduction to the east, south and west aspects by 1 to 1.5m. Crown reduction to the north aspect (where the tree is unbalanced) by 2 to 2.5m. Marycourt Convent Road Sidmouth Devon EX10 8RERef. No: 24/2104/TCA | Validated: Mon 14 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Variation of condition no.2 (approved plans) and confirmation of condition no.4, (self-build exemption) on planning permission 24/1485/FUL (Demolition of existing dwelling, proposed construction of 1no. replacement dwelling) – changes to design and proof that property is a self-build The Oaks Aylesbeare EX5 2DERef. No: 24/2100/VAR | Validated: Wed 16 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Change of use of land for the siting of three holiday cabins and conversion of existing forestry building to provide for holiday use, creation of parking area, bat building, bin storage and landscaping. Land East Side Of Oak Hill East BudleighRef. No: 24/2091/FUL | Validated: Tue 15 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Two storey extension on the west elevation, single storey extension on the south elevation, alteration to existing dormer on the north elevation and roof alteration to facilitate a first floor balcony on the south elevation. 6 Southdown Close Beer Seaton EX12 3ANRef. No: 24/2087/FUL | Validated: Fri 18 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Alterations to roof, fenestration and dormers, installation of solar panels and cladding. Offwell Barton Offwell Honiton EX14 9SARef. No: 24/2083/FUL | Validated: Fri 18 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Variation to Condition 2 (approved plans) and removal of condition 4 (cladding materials) on Planning Permission 20/0769/FUL (Construction of single storey front, side and rear extension, front and rear dormer window with terrace and front porch. Provision of cladding to main house) changes to roofline and external materials. Woodlands Withen Lane Farringdon Exeter EX5 2JHRef. No: 24/2082/VAR | Validated: Mon 14 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• The installation of 50MW battery clusters with ancillary equipment, including inverter units, 132kV transformer compound, site welfare and switch room, and two water tanks to provide standby, emergency electricity to support and facilitate renewable and low carbon energy projects Land To The West Of Wareham Road Scouse Farm Blackpool Corner Axminster EX13 5UERef. No: 24/2067/MFUL | Validated: Thu 17 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• T2, Weeping Lawson Cypress: removal of lowest limb extending across the boundary to 12 Lilley Walk. 21 Church Hill Honiton EX14 2DBRef. No: 24/2066/TRE | Validated: Mon 14 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Replace modern windows : 1no. window and 1no. dormer window on west elevation; 1no. window and 1no. dormer window on east elevation and 1no. window on north elevation. Flat 7 Green Gables All Saints Road Sidmouth EX10 8EURef. No: 24/2064/LBC | Validated: Mon 14 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Variation to the design of previously approved bungalow under approval reference number 22/0547/FUL 70 Malden Road Sidmouth EX10 9NARef. No: 24/2052/FUL | Validated: Mon 14 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Construction of a shed at the rear of the United Reform Church for the storage of food/items belonging to Sid Valley Food Bank United Reformed Church Primley Road Sidmouth EX10 9LBRef. No: 24/2044/FUL | Validated: Tue 15 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Proposal to remove agricultural occupation condition on 90/P0535. (Agricultural Dwelling) Sunnyfield Bungalow Yarcombe Honiton EX14 9NBRef. No: 24/2040/VAR | Validated: Wed 16 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Certificate of Proposed Lawful Development for the installation of PV array.Abbeyfield Society Marjorie Baker House Vicarage Street Colyton EX24 6LJRef. No: 24/1965/CPL | Validated: Thu 17 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• New lighting to existing footbridge and footpath. Exmouth Community College Gipsy Lane Exmouth Devon EX8 3AFRef. No: 24/1910/FUL | Validated: Fri 18 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Proposal to renew rear pitched roof with cement fibre slates 47A High Street Budleigh Salterton EX9 6LERef. No: 24/1845/FUL | Validated: Fri 18 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Demolition of existing garage and erection of new oak framed garage Sowden Cottage Sowden Lane Exmouth EX8 5ADRef. No: 24/1745/FUL | Validated: Fri 18 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Proposal to Install No. 3 Fascia Signs and No 4. Totem Signs Land Adjacent To Babbage Way Exeter Science Park Clyst Honiton EX5 2FNRef. No: 24/1552/ADV | Validated: Mon 14 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Renovation of existing first floor dormers including replacement of windows (retrospective) 104 & 106 High Street Sidmouth EX10 8EFRef. No: 24/1214/FUL | Validated: Mon 14 Oct 2024 | Status: Awaiting decision

EXMOUTH SEWAGE POLLUTION CLAIM AGAINST SOUTH WEST WATER 

As many readers will know, people in Exmouth have had enough of South West Water, especially as it had devasting effects on our beautiful seafront. For seveal days in the summer season, we had 

a deserted beach and angry visitors, residents and business owners. The reputational damage to Exmouth as a seaside resort could be considered immense. 

Nicky Nicholls, Community and Innovation lead at Sideshore spearheaded a campaign to bring an end to sewage pollution. Businesses, organisations and people affected by sewage pollution came together with the clear message, “Enough is enough.”

Last month, the upstairs room of Ocean on Exmouth seafront was packed full of people interested in finding out more about registering a group legal claim against South West Water. The legal firm who had been chosen to consider acting on their behalf was Leigh Day. 

This led to thousands of people affected by sewage in Exmouth, whether they are businesses or individuals registering an interest in making a claim.

I registered an interest as I’m not able to swim as frequently as I would like to in the sea. I’m reluctant to take my dog for a walk on the beach, as other pets have been ill and their owners have had to pay vet’s fees. I’m also concerned about the effects it’s having on our tourism industry. I heard about a taxi driver who had seen a decline in business as not so many people were visiting Exmouth. 

On 17th October, I received an email from Leigh Day stating they had now launched the sewage claim against South West Water in Exmouth! To be part of the claim, I had to complete a questionaire which they informed me would take only 2-3 minutes to complete.

Everything seemed straight forward and I was happy to proceed and be part of the no win, no fee group claim. 

I was invited to attend a zoom meeting with Leigh Day on Tuesday, 22nd October at 7 pm. to ask any questions that I may have. Unfortunately, I wasn’t able to be in the meeting from the start due to technical reasons. However, when I joined the meeting, I was reassured from hearing the legal reprentatives that Leigh Day are a reputable firm of solicitors. It was clear that they will advise us all the way throughout the claim and work in our best interests. If things were going to get unaffordable the solicitors wouldn’t pursue it. If the claim isn’t successful (ie No Win) then the insurance would pay and not the individuals who are making a claim. 

Claim forms were sent out from Leigh Day to those who had registered an interest in making a claim on 17th October. By 22nd October they had already received 500 claims. 

Those interested in making a claim but are unsure about whether they would be eligible might find this slide helpful. 

Who can make a claim? 

Public Nuisance 

1) Impacted hobby eg kitesurfing

2) Impacted dog walker

3) Property owner with decreased house value

4) Business dependent on tourism eg hotel

5) Business reliant on water eg paddle board rental

Private Nuisance

1) Property on waterway

2) Impacted fishing rights 

The representatives from Leigh Day stated that people could contact them directly by email or phone if they had any questions about their individual circumstances. Email: exmouthsewage@leighday.co.uk   Phone: 020 7650 1111

On Tuesday 29th October there is going to be a drop session at the Community Hub, Sideshore, Queen’s Drive, Exmouth for people to ask questions to the Leigh Day legal team from 11.30 to 5.30.

Information for those wishing to join the Exmouth Group Sewage Pollution Claim: https://www.leighday.co.uk/our-services/group-claims/exmouth-sewage-pollution-claim/?fbclid=IwY2xjawGJqLJleHRuA2FlbQIxMAABHfn_Py5pXsjnQFxru6QP40k4WOWiK4aTs460fwc0NfbeVLVUrF5bMp1Sgg_aem_4I72h2D-DJe28ToITkkn4g

Those who have joined the group claim can also join the Exmouth Sewage Pollution Claim Facebook group. Please read the instructions regarding eligibility to be in the group when joining. https://www.facebook.com/groups/852651286856384

This morning, Geoff Crawford, one of the Admin and Group experts of ESCAPE (End Sewage Convoys and Poollution in Exmouth), posted on their Facebook page that there will be a meeting tonight. (Thursday 24th October, 2024.)

“ESCAPE are looking forward to attending the “on the same page”meeting tonight. MP, SWW, EA, ETC, BTC, EDDC, DCC, Sideshore, ESCAPE. Progress?”

MP – Mr David Reed, SWW – South West Water, EA – Environment Agency, BTC – Budleigh Town Council, EDDC – East Devon District Council, DCC – Devon County Council, Sideshore, ESCAPE. 

In the comments on this post, a member of the ESCAPE facebook page asked, “What is this please?”

Geoff Crawford replied, “Its a big meeting of “a limited number of interested parties and SWW and EA so that we can all be on the same page” arranged by David Reed MP. Fortunate that ESCAPE have been included though realistically it is we who have brought this about through pressure. The aim of the briefing session is to inform local elected representatives on the current situation, and to give councillors the opportunity to ask SWW about the feasibility and timelines around their delivery plan.

This will allow all of us to collectively assess and judge SWW’s plans and delivery, and to ensure that we are getting the local network upgrades that we so desperately need. None of us want a repeat of the summer we have just had.”

As a correspondent, it is reassuring that these different organisations are working together. It will be interesting to find out if the Secretary of State for the Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Steve Reed has replied to the letter that Exmouth Town Council sent him last month inviting him to Exmouth.  https://exmouth.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2024/09/Letter-to-the-Sec-of-State-re-SWW-no-sig.pdf

Water companies in England could be banned from making a profit under plans for a complete overhaul of the system.

The idea is one of the options being considered by a new commission set up by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) amid public fury over the way firms have prioritised profit over the environment.

Helena Horton www.theguardian.com 

Sources at the department said they would consider forcing the sale of water companies in England to firms that would run them as not-for-profits. Unlike under nationalisation, the company would not be run by the government but by a private company, run for public benefit.

The nonprofit model, which is widely used in other European countries, allows staff to be paid substantial salaries and bonuses but any profits on top of that are returned to the company.

Welsh Water, which runs under this model, has no shareholders and any surplus money is reinvested back into the business or into customer services.

Since Welsh Water was bought in 2001 it has reduced its debt substantially; its ratio of debt to equity has dropped from 93% to 58% since not-for-profit Glas Cymru acquired the company with debts of £1.85bn.

The environment secretary, Steve Reed, said: “Our waterways are polluted and our water system urgently needs fixing. That is why today we have launched a water commission to attract the investment we need to clean up our waterways and rebuild our broken water infrastructure. The commission’s findings will help shape new legislation to reform the water sector so it properly serves the interests of customers and the environment.”

The news comes as Ofwat considers how much it will allow companies to raise bills by, with water firms having asked the regulator to let them increase charges by up to 84% over the next five years. All options were on the table to reform the regulators, including abolishing Ofwat, Defra officials said on Tuesday.

Public anger has grown in recent years over the large sums of money made by water bosses in England while water supplies have dwindled and sewage has been spilled into rivers.

There has also been anger at the mismanagement of companies such as Thames Water, which have been loaded with debt and paid shareholders billions in dividends. Since privatisation in 1989, the English and Welsh water companies have collectively paid £78bn in dividends and accumulated £60bn in debt.

Reed said he was not considering nationalisation as part of the review, which would cost “tens of billions of pounds”.

But the commission, chaired by the former deputy governor of the Bank of England Jon Cunliffe, will consider all other options to ensure infrastructure is built and sewage stops spilling into waterways.

Cunliffe’s independent commission will draw upon a panel of experts from across the regulatory, environment, health, engineering, customer, investor and economic sectors. Water company representatives will not be on the panel but will be consulted for their views.

Environmental groups have expressed concern after Defra said the key aim of the commission was to reform the regulators so they encouraged investment and growth. They have said the environment should be prioritised over economic growth, but Defra sources said that without investment, the reservoirs and sewers needed to tackle the climate and nature emergencies could not be built.

James Wallace, the CEO of campaign group River Action, said: “We must not see the environment sacrificed on the altar of economic growth. The water commission must stop vampiric business interests and international investors sucking the lifeblood and money from our waterways and communities. It must deliver a fully funded national action plan to end pollution for profit, enforce laws, and reform regulators.

“Taking a look at our neighbours in Europe shows a range of approaches from wholly nationalised to not-for-profit organisations including a blend of private, public and mutualised models. The key is effective economic and environmental regulation that incentivises operating for public benefit and makes polluters pay.”

Doug Parr, policy director of Greenpeace UK, said: “Too much emphasis on making the sector attractive to big international investors like Macquarie is the exact reason why our waterways are in such an appalling state today. With a natural monopoly on an essential resource like water, we need a regulatory system that forces the industry to provide an acceptable minimum level of service, including an end to the routine discharges of raw sewage.

“If big international investors are unable to make sufficient profit in that environment, then clearly this is not a problem that can be solved by big international investors, and the government will have to do what every other country in the world has done and look at other ownership options.”

Decisions made by the independent commission will not come into force until the 2029 price review. For this year’s price review, which sets water bill levels over the next five years, water companies on Tuesday made requests to increase bills by more than they had at the beginning of the process.

Thames Water is now asking to raise bills by 53% to an average of £667 a year by 2029/30, making them the most expensive water bills in the country. Southern Water is seeking the biggest hike at 84%.

Ofwat will make its final decision for how much water bills can rise on 19 December, but its interim decision made in July said the average bill could rise 21% a year. Government sources confirmed on Tuesday that this number could rise.

The prime minister’s spokesperson said: “Clearly no one wanted to see a situation where water bills are rising, where the water sector has got into the situation that it has, with record levels of sewage spills and ageing infrastructure. From the government’s perspective, our priority is making sure that money goes where it’s needed and ensuring that water companies are putting customers first. If money isn’t spent, it will be returned to customers.”