Manufacturers based in Boris Johnson’s new freeports will not be able to enjoy the full benefits if they are exporting to a series of countries with which the UK has signed post-Brexit trade deals.
The Prime Minister and Chancellor Rishi Sunak have championed freeports – special economic zones offering tax breaks and lower tariffs – as a part of the Government’s “levelling up” agenda to spread economic growth and jobs across the country.
But Labour said a “catastrophic blunder” means manufacturers operating within freeports could face tariffs on their exports to key markets including Switzerland, Canada, Norway and Singapore, despite the UK’s free trade agreements with those countries.
Officials insisted there has not been an error and businesses will not be shut out of markets in countries the UK has negotiated deals with.
The Opposition suggested that exports to 23 countries with which the UK has signed agreements to roll over deals those nations had with the European Union would be affected.
Labour said trade ministers failed to remove wide-ranging “duty exemption prohibitions” contained in 23 of those agreements.
The prohibitions state that any business which has not paid duty on its imports cannot benefit from reduced tariffs on its exports.
A Government spokesman said: “There is no error and it is not uncommon for free trade agreements to have these provisions.
“Businesses will not be shut out of markets we have negotiated free trade deals with.
“They will benefit from both our free trade programme, and also from freeports, which provide tax breaks, simpler planning restrictions and cheaper imports.”
Where the provisions apply, firms will be able to opt for either “duty drawback” – the refund of import duty when goods are re-exported – or from the preferential rates under the free trade agreement, providing they comply with the deal’s rules of origin tests.
Exports of goods to the 23 countries concerned were worth £35.56 billion in 2019, almost 10% of the UK’s total goods exports, Labour said.
Shadow international trade secretary Emily Thornberry has written to International Trade Secretary Liz Truss to ask her to clarify the situation.
Ms Thornberry said: “Last November, when the Treasury invited applications for its new freeports scheme, the small print warned potential bidders of the prohibition clauses contained in several continuity trade agreements the Department of Trade had signed in the previous two years.
“But, despite that warning, Liz Truss went on to sign trade agreements with 10 more countries containing the same clauses, including key markets like Canada, Singapore and Mexico.
“It would have taken an hour of discussion and the stroke of a pen to explain the UK’s freeports policy to negotiators from these countries and remove the prohibition clauses from those agreements, and I cannot understand why Liz Truss failed to do that.
“On the surface of it, this looks like a catastrophic blunder by a minister stuck in her silo, and, as a result, I fear that manufacturers in towns, cities and regions across our country who have succeeded in bidding for freeport status risk missing out on access to key markets.”
At the Budget in March, the Chancellor announced freeports at East Midlands Airport, in Felixstowe and Harwich, Humber, Liverpool City Region, Plymouth, the Solent, the Thames and Teesside.
He promised “eight new freeports in eight English regions, unlocking billions of pounds of private sector investment, generating trade and jobs up and down the country”.
Ministers are pressing ahead with changes to electoral law that could make it easier for Conservatives to win future mayoral elections, as Labour claimed 11 of the 13 posts being contested across England.
The UK home secretary, Priti Patel, has already unveiled plans to switch all future English mayoral elections from the existing supplementary vote system – in which the public ranks their two favourite candidates – to the first past the post system used in elections to the House of Commons.
Prof Tony Travers, of the London School of Economics, said analysis of Thursday’s polls suggested this change could open a potential route to victory for the Tories in cities such as London.
“It’s likely that first past the post would make it somewhat easier for the Conservatives to win if they could come up with a really good candidate,” he said.
Labour’s Sadiq Khan won the London mayoral contest comfortably against his Conservative rival, Shaun Bailey, once voters’ second preferences were taken into account. But Khan beat Bailey by only 40% to 35% on first preference votes, as some leftwing former Labour voters shifted to the Greens and other smaller parties.
Travers said Labour faced the joint challenge of finding a message that lets them take on the Conservatives at a national level while also stopping leftwing voters in major cities moving to the Greens.
“We’re back to the usual problem of the fragmentation of the left, while the centre-right vote is much better at holding itself together,” he said.
Despite Labour’s dominance in London, there are signs that the decades-long Conservative decline in the capital may have been arrested or gone into reverse. In some areas of the capital, Bailey outperformed Khan on first-preference votes, while the Tories have also been buoyed by growing support from Hindu and Sikh communities.
The government will have to pass fresh legislation to change the voting system, which would also affect elections for police and crime commissioners. Labour has pledged to oppose the changes but the Conservatives have a large majority in the Commons and the party is expected to rely on a vague manifesto commitment to the first past the post system as a justification to push it through the Lords.
Although Labour won most mayoral elections across England easily – with Andy Burnham receiving a landslide 67% of votes in Greater Manchester – under the new voting system it would be likely to lose others such as the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough mayoralty.
There is evidence that voters are confused by the use of the supplementary vote system. Almost 5% of ballots cast in this year’s mayor of London election were rejected, mainly because voters had voted for too many candidates.
Conservative candidates won two of the mayoralties that held elections on Thursday: Andy Street in the West Midlands and Ben Houchen with a landslide in Tees Valley.
Street and Houchen narrowly won against the odds in traditional Labour-voting areas when their positions were first contested in 2017. However, this week both candidates were reelected with substantially increased majorities, having trumpeted their ability to win funds for their local area from a central Tory government in Westminster.
Elsewhere, the incumbent Labour mayors Steve Rotheram, Marvin Rees, Norma Redfearn, Paul Dennett and Ros Jones retained their respective roles in the Liverpool city region, Bristol, North Tyneside, Salford and Doncaster respectively. The party’s Tracy Brabin also won the first-ever West Yorkshire mayoral contest.
The Queen’s Speech will feature a planning bill targetting home ownership in the Midlands and north in a bid to further strengthen the Tory position in traditional Labour heartlands, it has been reported.
Conservative leaders believe the number of people who owned their homes was the key to the party’s gains in last week’s local elections, according to the Times.
Labour received a drubbing in some parts of the country, losing control of a host of councils and suffering defeat at the hands of Boris Johnson’s Conservatives in Hartlepool, with the North East constituency electing a Tory MP for the first time since 1959.
The party also lost control of Durham council for the first time in a century, saw its local leader deposed by the Greens in Sheffield and witnessed heavy defeats in Rotherham and Sunderland authorities.
According to the paper, the planning bill is aimed at expanding the rates of home ownership across small cities and towns in areas which have historically voted Labour.
The reforms will reportedly simplify the planning process to make it more difficult for existing homeowners to block new housing schemes, with the country to be divided into “growth” or “protection” zones.
It is believed automatic planning approval will be given to homes, hospitals, schools, shops and offices in growth areas, while development in protected areas will be restricted but not ruled out.
The Times also reported the Government is set to trial a “first homes scheme” in the former Labour bastion of Bolsover, Derbyshire, which will give discounts of at least 30 per cent to first-time buyers in their local area.
The Queen’s Speech may also feature a long-awaited overhaul of the social care sector, with Cabinet Office minister Michael Gove’s prediction of having the reforms passing through Parliament within the next seven months a possible indication the proposals could make it into Tuesday’s announcement.
Mr Gove, asked whether the social care overhaul would form part of the Queen’s Speech, told Times Radio: “We’re working to make sure that we have an effective social care plan at the moment. That work is going on.
“So, by the end of the year you will have a specific social care plan that is heading for the statute books at the very least.
“We want to make sure that we can get cross-party support for it. That is critical.
“That’s the point the Prime Minister has always made. The more support we can get for it across parties, and I hope we do, the quicker we can be.”
Labour shadow health secretary Jonathan Ashworth said: “The test of whether this Queen’s Speech genuinely delivers for the people of Britain is if it brings forward a proper rescue plan for the NHS and delivers a social care solution as Boris Johnson promised on the steps of Downing Street almost two years ago.”
Downing Street has signalled that the Queen’s Speech on May 11 – when the monarch sets out the Government’s legislative agenda – will place renewed emphasis on Mr Johnson’s ambitions to “level up”.
Officials said as well as supporting the nation’s recovery from Covid-19 and backing the NHS, the speech will include draft laws designed to “spread opportunity across the UK”.
Downing Street has confirmed its programme, due to be revealed during the State Opening of Parliament, will see the return of both the controversial Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill and the Environment Bill, which they said will set legally binding environmental targets in the run-up to the international Cop26 summit in Glasgow later this year.
The former Bill was shelved during the last parliamentary session after it sparked violent protests in some places across the UK.
If approved, it would hand greater power to police in England and Wales to shut down protests deemed overly noisy or disruptive, with those convicted liable to fines or jail terms.
Usually one of the most colourful events of the parliamentary year, the Queen’s Speech this year will be a scaled-back affair due to coronavirus restrictions.
The visit of the Queen to the Palace of Westminster will see significantly fewer MPs and peers, a reduced royal procession into the House of Lords where the speech is given from and no diplomatic or non-parliamentary guests to be permitted.
From another Correspondent concerning the County election results:
Before we all get too excited about the Green Party’s Henry Gent winning in Whimple, where Sarah Randall Johnson came second (also elected as the area gets 2 County Councillors) let us not forget he is somewhat less green and somewhat more blue than others of his party and flag up this EDW report of his recent somewhat controversial land dealings:
The co-leader of the Green party has said voters have finally come to accept his party as a credible electoral force as he marked gains from both Labour and the Conservatives in local elections.
Jonathan Bartley said the party’s strong performance in areas such as Bristol – where it is now the joint-largest party, forcing the Labour mayor Marvin Rees into a run-off vote – showed it could no longer be dismissed as a wasted vote.
“We’re moving from being the biggest small party to being one of the big parties,” he said. “We’ve been polling ahead of the Lib Dems and we’ve seen in this election that there are no no-go areas for the Greens.”
He said the Green party was gaining support from Labour voters who felt disillusioned with the “authoritarian Blairism” of Keir Starmer, and winning over Tory voters coming to the party through environmental concerns raised by the likes of David Attenborough.
In Bristol, the Greens more than doubled their seats on the city council. Both they and Labour won 24 seats: Labour was down from 33 and the Greens were up from 11, while the Conservatives remained on 14. One of the new Green councillors is 18-year-old Lily Fitzgibbon, a founding member of Bristol Youth Strike 4 Climate, who helped organise the 2020 climate-emergency protest in the city which was attended by Greta Thunberg.
Bartley said: “Who does Labour represent any more? Who do the Conservative party represent any more? Neither of those two parties have a vision for the future. We want re-localised economies where people can work from home, we don’t want to shift hundreds of thousands of people a day on the daily commute.”
The party’s other co-leader, Siân Berry, finished a distant third as a candidate in the London mayoral election, but once again increased her vote share. The party was also pleased to win 12% of the capital-wide vote for the London Assembly.
Although their overall elected representation remains small, by Sunday evening the Greens had gained 82 councillors in England, giving them new representation in traditionally Labour-voting urban areas such as Sheffield as well as on rural Tory-dominated councils such as Suffolk.
Caroline Lucas has been the party’s only Westminster MP since winning Brighton Pavilion in 2010. The Greens now hope that Bristol West, held by Labour’s Thangam Debbonaire with a 28,219 majority, could show they are more than a one-city party.
Bartley dismissed the suggestion that the party should revive its 2019 electoral pacts with the Liberal Democrats, saying that related to the single issue of attempting to force a new EU referendum: “We’re a very different party to the Lib Dems.”
Instead, in an approach similar to traditional Lib Dem campaign tactics, the party will take advantage of the expected lull before the next general election by hiring campaign coordinators to target a handful of Westminster constituencies by promoting candidates as local champions. Breakthrough seats could include Bury St Edmunds and Sheffield Central.
The party once again failed to win any seats in the Welsh Senedd election, however, where it has traditionally struggled.
The Scottish Greens, which is a separate organisation from its counterpart in England and Wales, celebrated after winning a record eight seats in the Scottish parliament where it is likely to exert substantial power over the SNP after Nicola Sturgeon’s party fell short of a majority.
Colyton has long since been known as the most rebellious town in England – and its residents are rebelling again against any future unwanted development.
The East Devon town gained that moniker all the way back in 1685, when the Catholic James II was crowned king. Shortly after his coronation, his nephew, the Duke of Monmouth, travelled to the south west to build an army to overthrow the king.
Colyton was becoming increasingly influenced by Catholics, which led to religious dissent in the area, and as a result, 105 Colyton men chose to follow the Duke of Monmouth – more than any other Devon town.
It’s long history of rebellion has continued, and now the residents of the town have the chance to have their say on plans that would shape developments in the area for the next ten years and beyond with the Neighbourhood Plan now out for consultation.
The Plan outlines how the town and the parish wishes to conserve its historic heritage, protect its ‘green wedge’ between it and Seaton, and to improve links in and around the village, as well as with the Seaton Tramway.
Residents will now be able to share comments and views on the document for a consultation until June 22, 2021, and the plan covers a variety of topics including the natural environment, the built environment, heritage and housing, the local economy, transport and travel, and community and recreation.
The thrust of the plan is to ensure the unique and special attributes of the parish are protected and enhanced, and that any change is sensitively planned for.
Caroline Collier, chairman of the Neighbourhood Plan Steering Group, said: “After a process that has involved public consultations, surveys and workshops and with excellent independent professional guidance we have eventually produced this Submission Version of the Colyton Parish Neighbourhood Plan, which we believe represents a fair and worthy vision for the future development of the Parish.”
THE PARISH OF COLYTON
Colyton Parish is a relatively large parish of 2,573 hectares, some two miles to the north of the coastal settlements of Seaton and Axmouth. The two main settlements are Colyton, a small town with a population of circa 2,300, and Colyford a village (population circa 800) both towards the south-east of the Parish.
While only a proportion of the Parish, in the north and west, is within the East Devon Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) and thus receives the highest level of protection under national planning policy, it is the opinion of many parishioners that the quality of much of the rest of the Parish’s countryside merits inclusion in the AONB and warrants all the protection that can be given to it.
Colyford is an ancient village that straddles the main coastal road (the A3052), which has often acted as its lifeline, but also carries with it several problems. Colyford was a ‘borough’ in its own right, in medieval times, during which it had a significant trading base. Colyford is now largely residential and home to the well-respected Colyton Grammar School (an Academy Trust).
Colyton Grammar School (Image: Colyton Grammar School)
Colyford and Colyton are connected by road and the Tramway, which runs along the discontinued railway branch line from Seaton to Colyton.
Colyton has long been known for its markets and manufacturing, while traditional businesses such as the Tannery and the Wheelwright with a Royal Warrant remain proud working symbols of its ancient past.
While the nature of and balance between its products and services may have changed, the Parish still retains a relatively healthy local economy, although it did take a significant knock recently with the closure of Ceramtec after almost 50 years, which employed 80-100 people.
The Tannery, Wheelwright and the Tramway are just three of the many heritage features of a Parish that is steeped in history, with some unique facets, with most notable being the town’s reputation as the most rebellious town in England, because of the town’s non-conformists and dissidents supporting the Duke of Monmouth’s attempt to take the Crown in 1685.
THE VISION
The neighbourhood plan sets out a vision for the future of its neighbourhood, with Colyton parish aiming to be a uniquely characterful and caring place to live and work
The plan adds: “The vision statement could hardly do other than remind everyone that Colyton holds a distinctive place in the county’s history and long should our Parish continue to be regarded as unique. While our Plan may not be unique, it does have to conform to the strategic context provided for us, its policies are aimed at ensuring the many attributes that contribute to making us different and special are protected and enhanced, and any change is sensitively planned for.”
THE GREEN WEDGE AND THE ENVIRONMENT
The Green Wedge areas are fundamental to retaining and protecting the special character of the neighbourhood area, the plan says.
The green wedge between Colyford and Seaton extends to the south of the Parish, while there is a second green wedge between Colyton and Colyton, and the plan makes it clear that development proposals in the designated Green Wedge areas will not be supported, unless it can be demonstrated that no harm to the character or purpose of this area will occur.
The green wedge to be protected between Colyton, Colyford and Seaton
It adds: “Green wedges are substantial areas of undeveloped land on the edge of settlements which are recognised as playing an important role in shaping the character and enhancing the appearance of the settlement areas. Its main purpose is to prevent ‘creeping development’ that could lead to ‘the coalescence of adjacent or neighbouring settlements, villages or towns’.”
Policies in the plan make it plain that isolated new development or incursions into the green wedge area will be resisted, adding: “We recognise there may be a need and justification for small-scale development in the interests of ensuring that existing properties and businesses within the Green Wedge can continue to function properly. Any such development should be subservient to other buildings within the curtilage, sympathetic in character to its setting and not visually intrusive.”
The plan adds that proposals for new development on designated Local Green Spaces will also not be supported unless ancillary to their existing recreation or amenity use, or exceptional circumstances can be demonstrated.
The sites are Bridge House Garden, Colyford Play Park, Colyton Community Woodland and Picnic Site, Cuthouse Meadow Play Area, Road Green and Play Area, St Andrews Churchyard and St Andrews Garden, The Elms Amenity Area and St Michael’s Churchyard, Colyford.
Any designated area of local green space lost due to exceptional circumstances must be replaced by equivalent or better provision, in terms of quantity and quality in a suitable location, the plan states.
And with ancient woodland sites evident throughout the Parish, especially the 22 hectares of Holyford Woods, development proposals that would result in the loss of, or which would create unacceptable harm to, wildlife sites and other areas of ecological or geological importance, and which cannot be suitably mitigated, will not be supported.
Colyton: in the Coly valley – Looking north west near Ratshole Gate ( (Image: Martin Bodman/Geograph)
Public rights of way in the Parish are also to be protected from development, with measures to improve and extend the existing network of public rights of way supported, so long as their value as wildlife corridors is recognised and protected, and efforts are made to enhance biodiversity as part of the ‘development’ work wherever appropriate.
The plan adds: “The area is a popular walking area. The countryside and its footpaths attract visitors to the Parish. Many people take advantage of the tram to visit the area and use the established footpath network. There are over 40 public rights of way (footpaths and bridleways) around Colyford and Colyton. In addition, and importantly, the East Devon Way passes through the Parish including touching the edge of Colyton.”
DEVELOPMENT
The plan says that development within the Built-Up Area Boundary will generally be supported provided it makes an appropriate use of a brownfield site, is infill and predominantly surrounded by existing development; and there is no harmful impact on the Conservation Area and/or listed buildings.
For all developments in the neighbourhood area, including extensions and alterations to existing properties that require planning permission, buildings should be designed to a high level of energy efficiency aiming towards zero carbon, should be appropriate to its setting in terms of scale, height and massing and choice of materials, and opportunities should be encouraged to integrate bee bricks, bat and swift boxes in a suitable position within the development.
Colyton – Town Centre (Image: Colin Smith/Geograph)
Proposals for housing development outside the built-up area boundary will only be supported if it is demonstrated that it is a small development of up to 15 dwellings, to provide affordable housing for local need, that is evidenced, and it will not have a harmful visual impact on its setting or the landscape.
Where relevant, proposals to bring redundant or vacant historic buildings back into beneficial re-use may be supported, and a small number of market homes may be permitted where this is essential to enable the delivery of affordable units.
ECONOMY
The local economy benefits from being a tourist destination, with visitors drawn because of the area’s natural beauty, its heritage, and its unique reputation, the plan says, such as the Colyford Goose Fayre and the Beating of the Bounds, as well as the Seaton Tramway, which in the summer months, travels between Seaton, Colyford and Colyton and is one of Devon’s major tourist attractions, carrying over 100,000 passengers a year.
Colyton Station – The northern terminus of the Seaton Tramway. (Image: Colin Smith/Geograph)
The plan seeks to develop the Parish’s tourism offer further through sustainable development that takes advantage of the existing assets of the area, and adds that proposals for the change of use of existing business premises away from employment activity will be resisted, unless it can be demonstrated that its existing use is no longer economically viable, and all reasonable steps have been taken to let or sell the site or building for employment purposes for a period of at least 12 months.
Support is also given for measures to improve pedestrian links between the tramway stations and the centre of the settlement areas of Colyford and Colyton. The Terminus in Colyton is located on the edge of the town and, although the town centre is signposted, it involves using lanes without footpaths and is seen as ‘a walk too far’ for many visitors, the plan says.
It adds: “There has long-been a desire to create a dedicated and more direct footpath to and from the Tramway Terminus, which we have been reminded about in recent community consultations. At Colyford too, the tram station is on the edge of the village, which also has inadequate safe footpath links alongside the A3052.
“Development proposals specifically to maintain and enhance existing public transport provision within the area will be supported provided the proposals would not have significant harmful effects on the amenity of residents and other neighbouring uses and the local landscape, including environmental features and assets.
“We support the more general use of alternative transport modes to the private motor car. We are planning for an ageing and growing population and so public transport should remain an important service to the Parish. It will only be so if it is well frequented by local people and suitable public transport services are provided which go to places that residents want to go or need to visit.”
WHAT HAPPENS NEXT?
Colyton Parish Council has submitted its Neighbourhood Plan to East Devon District Council and residents will now be able to share comments and views on the document for a consultation until June 22, 2021.
After the consultation the plan will go before an independent examiner, who will inspect the plan against a series of ‘basic conditions’ that the plan must meet.
If the examiner is happy the plan meets the requirements then it will proceed to a local community referendum.
If more than half of the electors vote in favour of the plan it will then be adopted and will become part of the statutory development plan for East Devon.
Once adopted, the plan will be used to help inform future decisions about development and planning applications in the Colyton area.
The plan and all the supporting documents are now on the EDDC website, along with a comments form for residents to share their views, while hard copies of the plan will be available on request and to view at Colyton Library.
Anyone wishing to comment should send their comments by email to planningpolicy@eastdevon.gov.uk, or by post to Angela King, Planning Policy Section, East Devon District Council, Blackdown House, Border Road, Honiton, EX14 1EJ.
Is it possible that Marcus Hartnell, the Conservative who took the Seaton county seat from Martin Shaw, had a secret ally? The day after the election, a Twitter account calling itself the ‘Seaton Information Centre’ tweeted ‘We now have a new County Councillor in #seaton #Devon Let us hope he is better than the last one’. The handle for this account is @SeatonTIC, where TIC means Tourist Information Centre. This unofficial account was set up by former Seaton mayor Peter Burrows. He notoriously used it to libel the innocent owner of a Seaton micro pub two years ago, after which he had to resign and the Town Council asked him to stop using the account.
Now the account is being used to express its owner’s pleasure at Shaw’s defeat. Burrows, who had come a weak third in the 2013 County election [as Lib Dem candidate], was very displeased when Shaw came from nowhere to win in 2017, pushing his own vote lower still. He might be expected to take satisfaction in Shaw’s failure.
A complaint has been made to Seaton Town Council about the new use of this account to attack Shaw. The more interesting question, however, is the light it throws on the Tiverton and Honiton Lib Dems’ unexplained dropping of their offer to withdraw their candidate in Shaw’s favour, which he revealed this weekend (the Lib Dems haven’t commented). Was this because Burrows, or someone close to him, objected to this move?
While the tweet is cautiously worded, it suggests that the owner thinks Hartnell could hardly be worse than the man he replaced. Until now, it seemed that the shrinking of the Lib Dem vote had benefited Shaw, even if the votes for their candidate were greater than Hartnell’s majority. Now the question being asked is: Did Peter Burrows and some of his supporters actually vote for Hartnell, rather than the official Lib Dem candidate Martyn Wilson? Even Tiverton & Honiton Lib Dems might feel that was a step too far.
This is an interesting insight from Martin Shaw’s blog into the way our local democracy functions under the first past the post system. It shows how blind adherence to “old” national political allegiances and campaigning policies produces unintended, and counterproductive, consequences.
How Labour and the Lib Dems helped the Conservatives prevail in Seaton & Colyton, and across East Devon
After the sorrow comes the anger. In Thursday’s Seaton & Colyton election, I lost by 145 votes. Labour polled 306 and the Lib Dems 160. If either, and certainly if both, had stood down I could well have beaten the Conservative, Marcus Hartnell. I needed only one-third of their combined vote to prevail.
Both parties knew the seat was highly marginal. Both assured me privately they hoped I won. Both had ‘paper’ candidates. They did not campaign. Both knew, however, that with their candidates on the ballot, some voters would back them and inevitably take votes away from me.
However both parties thought that the opportunity to get a miserable share of the vote – by any measure, both 5.9 per cent and 3.1 per cent of the electorate are pathetic performances – was more important than getting a progressive, anti-Conservative councillor elected, someone they knew – based on my track record over the last 4 years – would vote with their parties most of the time.
Elsewhere in East Devon
Exactly the same thing happened in Axminster, where Independent EDA candidate Paul Hayward would also have won if half the Labour vote, or one-third the combined Labour/Lib Dem vote, had gone to him.
In Sidmouth, the Lib Dems were more enlightened, and did not stand against the Independent EDA candidate Louise MacAllister. Yet the Labour vote alone, 209, was still more than Stuart Hughes’ 170 majority. The opportunity to remove a Conservative cabinet member was lost.
It was not only Independent EDA candidates who lost the chance to beat the Conservatives. In the two-seat Exmouth division, where the two Conservatives got 7412 votes between them, the five opposition candidates shared 8164. It does not take much imagination to see that if there had been two, instead of five, there would have been a chance of edging out one or both of the Tories.
In Exmouth, the Independents (EDA did not stand), Lib Dems and Greens did at least recognise the situation by fielding only one candidate each, even if they failed to agree a common two candidates. Labour ploughed on regardless, and was rewarded with its two candidates coming in well behind the Independent and Lib Dem.
Labour’s moronic and arrogant approach
Labour’s approach is the worst of all these parties. Despite never having won either a district or county seat in East Devon, it continues with a ‘strategy’ – if you can call it that – of standing in every seat, regardless of how it benefits the Conservatives.
In this election, this resulted in miserable failure almost everywhere. The local party says that the national party forces them to stand – but if they didn’t submit their nomination papers, these sabotage, no-hope candidates would not exist. Still, local party officers carry on persuading 18-year-olds to put up in order to ‘get experience’, knowing it may hand seats to the Tories.
The exception to this story was Feniton & Honiton. There, because Independents and Greens did not stand, Labour got an unusually good 1491 votes, against the Tories’ 2094. If the Lib Dems hadn’t stood, they might have got closer. Surely there is a lesson here for the party – target one or two seats where you can reasonably hope to do well, and stop playing the Tories’ game everywhere else?
The Greens had a better strategy
In contrast, the Greens came near to such a strategy, deciding not to challenge myself, Paul Hayward and Louise MacAllister since we were poised to win in our finely balanced divisions. They clearly concentrated their resources on Broadclyst, and it seems only right that have been rewarded with their first seat in East Devon, where Henry Gent topped the poll and took a seat from the Tories. Congratulations!
The sorry taleof the Lib Dems – and an inside story of my Seaton & Colyton defeat
I have left the Lib Dems until last. This is in a way the saddest story. Unlike Labour, they acknowledge the need for cooperation. At EDDC, they are working well with the East Devon Alliance, Greens and progressive Independents to provide a historic first non-Conservative administration. In the case of Sidmouth, they did recognise that it was logical to help the Independent EDA challenger to Stuart Hughes, by not standing a candidate.
However in Seaton & Colyton, and Axminster, a different Lib Dem constituency party (Tiverton & Honiton) persevered with no-hope candidates. I can now reveal that this was despite the fact that the original Lib Dem candidate for Seaton contacted me to offer a deal where she would stand down in return for a joint public statement. This was not her private initiative – it followed discussions in the constituency party and she said that John Timperley, their 2019 General Election candidate, would contact me to discuss the detail.
She may have jumped the gun, because I never heard from Timperley, the party in its wisdom decided not to proceed, and a new candidate, Martyn Wilson, ended up on the ballot paper. I met him when he was leafleting. He too said he hoped I would win. I don’t know if his 160 votes, by themselves, would have been enough to tip the balance to me. But a Lib Dem withdrawal and a joint declaration might have had an effect larger than the numbers, benefiting both sides.
This cannot be allowed to happen again
Labour, the Lib Dems, Greens and the East Devon Alliance have a common interest in ensuring that complacent Conservative domination of East Devon, and Devon as a whole, comes to an end. This election was a historic opportunity to make real steps towards this. If Tories had been deprived of Seaton, Axminster, Sidmouth andeven one of the Exmouth seats, along with Otter Valley, won by an Independent, and one in Broadclyst, 6 out of 12 East Devon county seats would have been in opposition hands.
Instead, as it was in 2017, it is 10-2 for the Tories. This does not reflect the way people voted. 29564 votes were cast for the combined opposition, compared to only 22265 for the Conservatives. We could have had results which more or less reflected that situation. Instead we are all grossly underrepresented.
Making first-past-the-post work for the opposition
Many of us recognise that the electoral system is flawed. But it is what we have, and we won’t get change until we remove the Tory government using the existing system. In the United States, where they also have the 18th-century system, the progressive forces – from socialists to greens and centrist liberals – unite in a single party. They have got rid of Trump. They have a progressive reforming administration both at federal and many state and local levels.
We’re not looking at a single party. There are strengths in each of the party traditions as well as in the Independent approach. But we MUST, each of us, look at the contribution we can make to a united electoral alternative in Devon.
I am proud that in this election, the EDA only supported Independent candidates in the 3 divisions where we were close last time, and knew we could win. We could have stood paper candidates elsewhere to boost our brand, but resisted the temptation, knowing it would only harm the national parties where they had better chances of winning. Next time round, this must be our common approach. Or Tory rule could continue more or less indefinitely … .
New analysis by CPRE has found that local authorities are increasingly planning major developments in AONBs, largely consisting of executive-style housing – with only 16% classed as affordable. We’ve found government pressure to increase housing numbers is forcing local authorities to prioritise new building over landscape protection.
In calling for special controls over development in areas of ‘special beauty’, CPRE’s founding manifesto of 1926 marked the origins of our campaign for protected landscapes.
By 1949, we’d helped bring about the National Parks Act – which also allowed for the creation of Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONBs) to safeguard landscapes deemed not wild or large enough for National Park status, but considered equally beautiful. Beginning with the designation of the Quantocks AONB in 1956, 34 AONBs (covering 15% of England) have put natural beauty within 30 minutes of two-thirds of the population.
Worrying trends
Thanks to previous CPRE lobbying, government planning guidance recommends that ‘major development’ on AONB land should only happen under exceptional circumstances, and only when it can be demonstrated that it is in the public interest. But our new research has found that local authorities are increasingly allowing development in AONBs.
Government pressure to increase housing numbers is completely undermining AONBs’ legal purpose to ‘conserve and enhance natural beauty’. Every year since 2017/2018, we’ve seen an average of 1,670 housing units approved in AONBs – representing an annual loss of 119 hectares of supposedly protected landscape.
‘Government pressure to increase housing numbers is forcing local authorities to prioritise new building over landscape protection’
While these housing numbers constitute a 27% increase on the previous five year period (from 2012-17), the amount of countryside they are being built on has more than doubled (up by 129%), indicating an increasingly wasteful use of land. In fact, our research found that greenfield developments in AONBs are using up twice as much land as the national average in providing just 16 dwellings per hectare.
Despite their inherent unsustainability, we found that 80% of planning applications on greenfield AONB land are given permission, flying in the face of planning guidelines. This success rate is encouraging further speculative applications: 967 were submitted in the first five months of 2020/21, putting it on course for the highest annual total since 2017/18.
High housing pressure is also having a major impact on the landscape ‘setting’ of AONBs, with 27,857 housing units approved for building within 500 metres of their boundaries in the past five years – an increase of 135% on 2012-17.
Targeting the south
We identified a particularly intense pressure on these landscapes in the south east and south west of England, which are accommodating 85% of the national total of homes planned for AONBs.
The Dorset and Chilterns AONBs – both recommended for National Park status by the government’s independent Glover Review of landscapes – have both seen 771 housing units on greenfield land approved since 2017. Meanwhile, the Cotswolds AONB (also recommended for National Park status) saw a tripling in new housing.
The Glover Review’s recommendations, published at the end of 2019, endorsed CPRE’s longstanding calls for AONBs to be given a stronger voice in planning decisions, noting the ‘particular development pressure’ on the High Weald and the Kent Downs AONBs. Indeed, our research found that the High Weald has seen 932 homes approved on greenfield sites since 2017, while the Kent Downs has experienced a ten-fold increase in development.
Planning for people and nature
Commenting on the findings, CPRE chief executive Crispin Truman has said that ‘the fact that some of our most highly prized areas of countryside are being lost to build more executive homes says a great deal about our planning system.’ That is why we are calling on the government to use the upcoming Planning Bill to strengthen protections for AONBs and ensure that any development meets the needs of local people.
This should include clear guidance that AONBs’ role in conserving and enhancing natural beauty must take priority over housing targets. Furthermore, planning policy must also ensure that development is not permitted in the setting of an AONB if it would have an adverse impact on the experience and appreciation of the landscape within.
‘We’d like to see policies that encourage the smaller, community-led schemes that are much more likely to provide affordable and social homes for local people.’
But while giving local authorities the power to reject inappropriate developments, we’d also like to see policies that encourage the smaller, community-led schemes that are much more likely to provide affordable and social homes for local people. And because the people who manage these landscapes are best placed to advise on their future, we want to see AONB partnerships fully consulted on any major developments that affect them, with their advice given the utmost consideration in decision-making.
Empty promises?
Last November, the government’s ‘Ten point plan for a green industrial revolution’ argued that ‘the natural environment is one of the most important and effective solutions’ for capturing and storing carbon – an argument that underpinned their pledge to ‘protect and improve’ AONBs and National Parks ‘for future generations’.
These are noble aims, strongly supported by CPRE, and yet they are currently undermined by the government’s own policies. Our national legacy of natural beauty – created and cared for over centuries – is in grave risk of being left in a diminished and degraded state for our grandchildren.
Protecting and enhancing our Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty should be a cornerstone of this generations’ efforts to leave the natural environment in a better state than we found it. With meaningful protections and a truly democratic planning system, CPRE believe it should be possible to deliver the homes we need in sustainable locations, while allowing our finest landscapes to continue providing incredible benefits for people, wildlife and the planet.
This story keeps surfacing but the Government still sticks to the notion that the bottleneck in building is due to councils failing to grant planning permissions. – Owl
More than 1.1m homes that received planning permission in England over the last decade are yet to be built, according to the Local Government Association, which called for new powers to be given to councils to encourage developers to build housing more quickly.
The LGA, which represents 327 of the 333 councils in England, said that 2.78m homes have been granted planning permission by councils since 2010/11, but over the same period only 1.6m have been built. The number of planning consents granted for new homes has more than doubled since 2010, with nine in 10 planning applications being approved by councils.
The LGA said the Queen’s speech should include legislation that enables councils to charge developers full council tax for every unbuilt development when the original planning permission expires.
The government should also make it easier for councils to use compulsory purchase powers to acquire stalled housing sites, or sites where developers do not build to timescales agreed with a local planning authority.
Developers have ramped up homebuilding in recent years since the slump caused by the 2009 financial crisis, with completions reaching 210,600 in 2019-20 – the highest level in the past 10 years. But this falls far short of building the 300,000 homes a year the government has pledged.
The Home Builders Federation denied that builders were sitting on land unnecessarily. Andrew Whitaker, its planning director, said: “Whilst housing supply has doubled in recent years the planning process remains the biggest constraint on further increases.
“Many of the homes included in these numbers will have actually been completed or are on sites where construction work is ongoing. Others will only have an initial consent and be struggling their way through the treacle of the local authority planning departments to get to the point where builders are allowed start work.”
Joshua Carson, head of policy at the consultancy Blackstock, said: “The notion of developers ‘sitting on planning permissions’ has been taken out of context. It takes a considerable length of time to agree the provision of new infrastructure on strategic sites for housing and extensive negotiation with councils to discharge planning conditions before homes can be built.”
The LGA says only by building more council homes can the housing crisis be tackled and the government’s housebuilding target be met. It is calling for councils to be given the powers to kickstart a social housebuilding programme of 100,000 homes a year. Polling by the association has found that 80% of MPs and 88% of peers think councils should have more financial freedoms and powers to build new homes.
Cllr David Renard, the LGA’s housing spokesperson, said: “It is good the number of homes built each year is increasing. But by giving councils the right powers to incentivise developers to get building once planning permission has been granted, we can go further and faster … We need the Queen’s speech to deliver the reform needed to enable councils to tackle the housing crisis.”
Whittaker said: “We would welcome a contribution by local authorities towards housing supply but regardless of who builds the houses, evidence clearly shows that if we are to reach the 300,000 target many more permissions will need to be granted. It is vital that planning departments are sufficiently resourced and that applications are processed efficiently so that work can begin on sites more quickly.”
The fleet of Hitachi 800 trains entered service in 2017
Some railway services across the UK have been cancelled after hairline cracks were found in high-speed trains.
The issue was found in the Hitachi 800 series trains, which are used by Great Western Railway, London North Eastern Railways and Hull Trains.
The operators warned there would be cancellations and disruption while the cracks were investigated.
Passengers have been advised to check before travelling and to consider postponing journeys.
All high-speed GWR services between London, Bristol, Cardiff and Penzance have been cancelled and customers are advised not to attempt to travel today.
LNER is currently advising passengers not to travel.
It means limited to no service on the East Coast – between Edinburgh, Newcastle, York and London.
A spokesman for Hull Trains said the problem was being investigated by Hitachi, and once trains had been checked it was hoped they could be released back into service “as soon as possible”.
“This could affect a significant number of our services and passengers should check before they travel,” the spokesman added.
The fleet of Hitachi 800 trains entered service in 2017 and was designed to be electric, but engines were also fitted with diesel power because of delays with railway electrification.
The trains were made at the Hitachi factory in Newton Aycliffe, County Durham.
For the moment the electorate appears to be content to credit the Tories with successfully delivering a vaccination programme and the promise of economic recovery. Despite the mess over Brexit fishing rights. How long will this last?
Today’s Western Morning News summarises the results in the Peninsular as follows:
…Labour losing control of Plymouth City Council, and Cornwall switching to the Tories in time for the G7 summit; plus, Devon County Council remains under Tory control, albeit with a slightly reduced majority…
Note: two divisions in East Devon – Exmouth and Broadclyst – where two councillors are elected in each, won’t begin counting until this morning, so a final result and composition of Devon County Council won’t be known until later today.
However, the East Devon Alliance (EDA) suffered a bitter blow as Martin Shaw failed to retain Seaton & Colyton by a wafer thin margin.
EDA candidates also failed to take Axminster and Sidmouth, but again only by small margins:
Axminster: Paul Hayward (EDA) lost to Ian Hall (Con) by 1,439 to 1,672
Seaton & Colyton: Martin Shaw (EDA) lost to Marcus Hartnell (Con) 2,176 to 2,321
Sidmouth: Louise Mac Allister (EDA) lost to Stuart Hughes (Con) 2,431 to 2,601
(Other candidates received few votes – full results here www.devonlive.com)
The positive message to take from this is that, where EDA fields a candidate it is in a very strong position to win.
Jess Bailey (Ind) held Otter Valley, the division vacated by Claire Wright by 3,224 votes to 1,281 for Charlie Hobson (Con)..
Exeter City
Bucking the trendLabour have retained control of Exeter City Council – and with an increased majority. www.devonlive.com
Cornwall
The election for Cornwall Council is different this year after boundary changes by the Government cut the number of councillors from 123 to 87. Owl’s skimming over the results show some divisions being decided with candidates winning having only received 700/800 votes. Something wrong with democracy here.
(Owl has yet to digest the overall turnout figures, but some of the divisions are becoming so large as to make it very difficult for those not backed by a national party to contest. This even more apparent in the farcical Police Crime Commissioner elections. A correspondent asked Owl why all PCC candidates came from national parties!).
I am writing to you as I am becoming increasingly concerned by the size and scale of the proposals contained in the Dorset Local Plan.
It seems that the Plan contains many tired old ideas about solving the housing problems by building on green field sites – often away from existing settlements. DOR 13 is the most extreme of this type of oldfashioned “new-town” planning.
At this time, coming as it is at the end of a pandemic and at a time of great change to how traditional buildings are being used in town centres, surely this is the time to seize the moment to develop a Local Plan that is both innovative and successful.
One that Dorset can be proud of.
At first glance it may seem not relevant to a rural environment such as Dorset: the county not having any cities.
But, of course, that is not the whole story. If we look at the Bournemouth/Christchurch/ Poole conurbation we have a settlement bigger than Southampton, Portsmouth or Exeter.
So, the conurbation is equivalent in size to a major city.
Therefore, the reported move from office and retail space to homes is very relevant. Even in small towns, such as Dorchester and Wimborne, council offices and other buildings are rapidly becoming empty and retail spaces are changing to domestic use. So, immediately we can see that the old approaches to town planning need to change.
New homes do not have to equate with building new houses and destroying the green lungs that towns like Dorchester depend upon.
Secondly, you have put on record that you are preparing to build houses that are not only allocated to the Dorset Council area but also those allocated to BPC Council. Why?
My understanding is that it is the responsibility of the Planning Authority drawing up a Local Plan to think and work strategically.
That means thinking outside the narrow confines of a single authority, but to look at working collaboratively with neighbouring authorities.
In our case that is East Devon, South Somerset, Wiltshire and BPC. Clearly it would be nonsense to plan for development in Sherborne without considering Yeovil (analogous with the dormitory/commuting relationship of Dorchester & Weymouth). Equally weird would be to plan developments in Bridport without considering Crewkerne, Chard and Axminster.
Now when considering Dorset’s eastern reaches, the relationship with BPC cannot be ignored and, given the pressures that you already perceive, means that the councils must inevitably work together. But, of course, Dorset is not the only player here – and not the only one that BPC can call on to help it meet its own target (why can’t it?).
Hampshire shares a border with both Dorset and BPC. Therefore, strategically the three councils should and must work together.
So, to sum up. Without considering the rapidly evolving working environment, The Local Plan is flawed.
Without considering the strategic options of collaborating with our neighbouring councils, the Local Plan is deeply flawed.
Without considering either of these issues, the Local Plan is fatally flawed.
Billed as A Celebration of Sidmouth Folk Festival, the event from July 30 until August 6, will be an ‘authentic taste’ of the traditional event.
The Sidmouth Folk Festival plans to return in full in 2022, the organisers said.
John Braithwaite, festival director, said: “We are looking forward to this special celebration, as we thank everyone who helped the festival survive last year’s cancellation and to secure its future.
“All this year’s festival activities will be run in line with existing Covid-19 guidance.
“All relevant precautions and health and safety measures will be taken to ensure people’s comfort, and to maximise their enjoyment.”
He added: “Heartfelt thanks again to all who supported the Crowdfunding campaign.
“Some rewards will be redeemable this year, some will need to be deferred to 2022 and that option remains for all pledges.
“Please do join us in our beautiful seaside home in the first week of August to celebrate the ongoing future of The Sidmouth Folk Festival.
“And we look forward to returning in 2022 in grand style.”
The line-up for this year’s celebration event includes live headline performances by festival patrons Show of Hands, the Eliza Carthy Trio and Scottish folk band Talisk. Tickets go on sale later this month.
These outdoor concerts, at Blackmore Gardens, take into account the current preference for open air events, following results from audience surveys conducted by the festival team.
The gardens will also be the venue for a host of free daytime family entertainment, including dance music, street theatre, special events, plus stalls selling food and drink.
Festival activity and entertainment is planned for The Ham lawn.
And there will be live-streamed events and workshops, with details to be announced later this month.
The organsiers said: “Following on from the rip-roaring success of last year’s online festival, there will also be a major web-based presence again in 2021, including live streaming from the town and plenty of workshops, with more details to be announced in late May.”
Vegetation and tree clearance work at a project that will return a Devon estuary and floodplain to a more natural condition has been postponed after campaigners were left furious over the impact it would have on nesting birds.
Wildlife TV presenter Chris Packham led the campaign after highlighting the issue in a video on Twitter that has been viewed over 35,000 times.
The project, that was set to begin on Tuesday, would have seen the removal of vegetation on the River Otter estuary, which would be essential for the success of the project and the restoration of an intertidal landscape which will become home to many new species.
But following the protests, the Environment Agency has said the start of work has been reviewed, and landowners Clinton Devon Estates have confirmed the work will be postponed.
The EU-funded Lower Otter Restoration Project (LORP) will reconnect the River Otter to its historic floodplain and return the lower Otter Valley to a more natural condition; creating more than 50 hecatres of intertidal mudflats, saltmarsh and other valuable estuarine habitats.
The creation of new habitats and restoration of the site will be achieved by breaching the embankment. This will allow a much greater extent of the original floodplain to flood at high tide and drain at low tide producing important intertidal habitat, mudflats and saltmarsh for wading birds. There will also be areas of reedbed and grazing marsh.
Once established, the new site will become a wildlife reserve of international importance within five years, fulfilling the aspirations of all partners involved.
Chris Packham (Image: BBC)
In a statement, Clinton Devon Estates said: “Following consultation with our partners and other environmental organisations over risks to nesting birds, the start of vegetation clearance work in preparation for the Lower Otter Restoration Project has been postponed.
“Any works in the future will be undertaken on the basis that they will not have a risk of impacting breeding birds.
“The purpose of this vital project has always been to work with nature to achieve a more sustainable way of managing the Otter Estuary and its immediate surroundings, and we are committed to ensuring this continues to be a priority.”
An Environment Agency spokesman added that the delay had been agreed so ‘that timings reflect the balance of ecological risks’.
They added: “Vegetation and tree clearance is one of the first elements in advance of starting earthworks and construction work on the project. The period in which vegetation clearance could be carried out has been dictated by ecological factors, the period in which dormice can be sensitively displaced under licence, and external funding factors. We sought to manage risks associated with nesting birds through the development of clearance procedures directed and controlled by ecologists.
“However, following consultation with our partners and other environmental organisations over risks to nesting birds, the start of vegetation clearance work has been postponed. Any works which are undertaken in the future will be on the basis that they will not impact breeding birds. The purpose of this vital project has always been to work with nature to achieve a more sustainable way of managing the Otter Estuary and its immediate surroundings, and we are committed to ensuring this continues to be a priority.”
In his video post on Twitter, Packham said: “Workers were to turn up and destroy an area of scrub which is home to schedule one species. It is the breeding season as they are likely to have nests and eggs and young and we know that they are protected and you can’t destroy them.
“The EA say they have to do the work now because they cannot do it after June because of dormice on site. The bigger picture is that when the work is completed, it will generate a very rare and valuable piece of coastal habitat so the outcome could be good, but you cannot just start destroying bird’s nests when they are protected, so what sort of signal is this sending out to developer’s elsewhere.
“Come on EA, wake up. You have to do your duty on our behalf and you are meant to look after our environment and the species that live there as next time it may not be a project with a good ecological outcome. Please think again.”
In a statement outlining the project of the LORP website, it had been said that the vegetation and tree clearance was due to start on May 4 and construction phasing and project funding deadlines dictate the timing, which is further constrained by the period allowed under the necessary dormouse licence.
Ecologists were due to accompany each clearance team and where nesting birds or signs of bats are found these places will be protected, and the birds left to rear their chicks, with buffer zones around nests.
All work was due to have been informed by wildlife surveys with ecological impacts assessed by independent ecologists and being completed in accordance with the Environmental Statement, which was an important part of planning, as the work was being undertaken with the full knowledge and support of Natural England.
The statement added: “Although we know the timing of vegetation clearance for May is not ideal for birds this is constrained by the presence of dormice (a European protected species) and the need to carry out the works in the short period allowed by the licence required (as well as construction phasing and project funding deadlines).
“Before vegetation is cleared, experienced ecologists will carefully search for nesting birds and sites used by bats. Where these are found they will be left undisturbed, with a buffer zone to ensure protection. Qualified ecologists have already carried out pre-clearance surveys and will continue to do so before and during works.
“The scheme will create over 55 hectares of rare inter-tidal habitat including mudflat and saltmarsh. However, it will result in the removal of 0.7 ha of broadleaf semi-natural woodland, 34 mature trees and 2.5km of hedgerow. Where woodland, hedgerow and tree habitats are removed these will be replaced in the lower Otter Valley outside of the project area resulting in a habitat gain of just over two hectares of broadleaf woodland and 1.5km of hedgerow. All vegetation clearance methods will follow best recognised practice to ensure that disturbance to wildlife is minimised with all necessary protected species licences in place.”
But the project has now been delayed, with no date yet confirmed for when the vegetation clearance will begin.
When complete, the flood plains project is expected to create 55 hectares (136 acres) of wildlife habitat on the river, estuary and floodplain.
The government has been urged to publish details of up to £2bn in Covid-19 contracts awarded to private healthcare companies, including some that have helped fund the Conservative party.
Contracts to provide extra capacity during the pandemic have been handed to 17 firms since March 2020.
The NHS has said enlisting independent hospitals helped add 6,500 beds, freeing space to treat Covid-19 patients and allowing elective procedures to continue.
The government has not published full details about the contracts, while data on how much the NHS has spent on them is also yet to be released.
The first of two groups of contracts, running from March to December 2020, had 26 firms initially enlisted to provide extra capacity, to a value of £1.6bn.
The government said it did not pay for beds and staff that were not needed, adding that in the end only 17 firms provided services, at cost price.
Accounts for Practice Plus Group, which won £76.3m of work under the contract, raise questions about this assertion. They state that it worked on a “cost plus” basis, using a “cost plus pricing formula”.
The company declined to comment, and referred queries to its trade association, the Independent Healthcare Provider Network.
Accounts for Ramsay Health Care, which won work worth up to £271.1m from March to December 2020, say it worked at cost price plus an extra 8.6% in infrastructure costs. The company said it did not profit from the contract and had made losses during the pandemic.
A second set of contracts for January to March 2021, as peaking case numbers placed huge strain on the NHS, was worth up to £474m. Unlike the first set of contracts, these included minimum payments for making capacity available, as well as for services that were actually used.
Jo Maugham, the director of the Good Law Project, said:“Billions of pounds of public money has been handed to private healthcare firms with hardly any transparency – many of which happen to have links to the Conservative party.
“No one would fault government for doing what was necessary to increase capacity to ensure people could still get the care they needed at the height of the pandemic, so what it is that government has got to lose from publishing these contract details?”
While there is no suggestion of wrongdoing on the part of the companies, Maugham stressed the importance of transparency, particularly given that many of them, or their directors, had either donated money to the Conservatives in the pastor worked in the government.
One Healthcare, recipient of work worth up to £17.7m, is owned by the asset manager Octopus Investments, which gave the Tories £12,500 in 2018.
Ramsay Health Care, which operates 34 UK hospitals and treatment centres, won contracts worth up to £380m. Its general counsel previously worked for the Department of Health and Social Care between 2008 and 2013.
Ramsay said he was not involved in negotiating the contracts but did work on their coordination and legal drafting.
Practice Plus Group is owned by the private equity group Bridgepoint, whose advisory board includes the Conservative life peer Stuart Rose and Alan Milburn, the former Labour health secretary.
An NHS spokesperson said: “When NHS hospitals were first under significant pressure from high Covid-19 infection rates, the NHS worked with independent sector hospital providers to secure access to additional hospital capacity, staff and equipment and these providers have delivered almost 3m treatments and services since the start of the pandemic.”
The NHS is understood to be preparing to publish data on how much has been spent on the contracts.
The Independent Healthcare Provider Network said its members provided services at cost and were audited to ensure taxpayers’ value for money.
A spokesperson said: “Over the last year, independent providers helped to keep vital services such as cancer care going throughout the pandemic, delivering over 3.2m procedures for NHS patients under these unprecedented arrangements, including over 160,000 cancer and cardiology treatments.”
The government has since drawn up a third group of contracts, under a framework agreement, which could lead to suppliers from a list of 90 approved private companies awarded £10bn of work over four years.
East Devon Watch 