If so please contact their transport hub on:
01392 403913
Author Archives: East Devon Watch
“Clean coal” – like “cheap nuclear energy”?
Substitute “nuclear energy” (or perhaps Hinkley C!) to see what can go wrong with flagship, vanity energy projects that ignore renewable power:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/mar/02/clean-coal-america-kemper-power-plant
“Public at risk from ‘daily cocktail of pollution’ “
We can all do more – but big institutions can do a lot more. AND our councils can lead … sorry could lead if there was the foresight and will. Has our CCG – always thinking of our health (lol) – considered this? You bet not!
“People are being exposed to a daily cocktail of pollution that may be having a significant impact on their health, England’s chief medical officer says.
Prof Dame Sally Davies said the impact of air, light and noise pollution was well recognised in the environment.
But she said its role in terms of health was yet to be fully understood.
Dame Sally added there was enough evidence to suggest action had to be taken. And, in her annual report, she said the NHS could lead the way in cutting pollution levels. She said one in 20 vehicle journeys was linked to the NHS, either from patients or staff travelling.
Seven charts that explain the plastic pollution problem
And making sure services were brought out of hospitals and closer to people’s homes could help reduce that burden.
Dame Sally also pointed to the attempts being made to phase out ambulances run on diesel, a key source of nitrogen dioxide, which is linked to respiratory disease.
And she said the NHS could cut its use of disposable plastics, landfill and incineration. …”
“NHS England treats too many patients as an emergency, watchdog warns”
“The ageing population and other unexplained factors mean hospitals are now treating 5.8 million patients as emergency admissions every year, 24% more than a decade ago, the NAO found. Together they cost the health service £13.7bn, almost a 10th of its budget, and account for 33.59m bed days.
Its hard-hitting report, published on Friday, praises NHS England’s handling of the extra numbers but also criticises its failure to put in place enough services outside of hospitals to keep patients healthier.
The watchdog believes this lack of provision underpins its finding that 24% of emergency admissions are avoidable, implying that £3.43bn a year of NHS funds may be being wasted on people who, with better care, would not have ended up falling ill.
GPs offered cash to refer fewer people to hospital
The NAO said: “The impact on hospitals of rising emergency admissions poses a serious challenge to both the service and financial position of the NHS.”
It acknowledged that hospitals have done well to reduce the overall impact of rising emergency admissions in recent years, in particular by reducing patients’ length of stay and treating more patients as day cases.
But it warned: “[The health service] cannot know if its approach is achieving enduring results until it understands whether reported increases in readmissions are a sign that some people admitted as an emergency are being discharged too soon.
“The NHS also still has too many avoidable admissions and too much unexplained variation. A lot of effort is being made and progress can be seen in some areas, but the challenge of managing emergency admissions is far from being under control.”
The NAO cast serious doubt on whether key government-backed NHS initiatives to keep people out of increasingly overloaded hospitals have proved effective. The NHS’s longstanding policy of reducing its supply of beds has made things even more difficult for hospitals trying to deal with rising emergency admissions, the watchdog added.
The latest NHS data published on Thursday on how health services are coping with winter’s intense pressures shows that 95.3% of hospital beds were occupied last week – more than 10% more than the limit considered necessary for patient safety.
The NAO also voiced concern that the number of emergency admissions varies from 73 to 155 per 1,000 overall admissions in different parts of England, suggesting NHS trusts’ admission policies appear to be inconsistent and possibly wasteful.
NHS organisations and health unions endorsed the NAO’s conclusion that health service leaders’ failure to create and deliver more services in and nearer patients’ homes, despite promises to do so, was a key factor behind the upward trend in admissions.
The number of nurses working in NHS community services fell by 15% between 2010 and 2017, the Royal College of Nursing pointed out.
“People, particularly older people, are not getting the support they need in the community, which leads to more emergency admissions and dangerous levels of bed occupancy when demand is high, as we have seen this winter”, said Donna Kinnair, the RCN’s director of nursing, policy and practice.
Saffron Cordery, the deputy chief executive of NHS Providers, which represents hospitals, said proper community services were “central to the [NHS’s] ambitions” to transform the way it cares for patients. However, she added, efforts to do so had been hampered by underfunding and such care not being seen as a priority.
Prof Keith Willett, NHS England’s medical director for acute care, said: “As the report states, there are 12% fewer A&E patients being admitted than was predicted at the start of the decade, and hospitals, community trusts and GPs trialling new models of care have meaningfully reduced admissions compared with their peers.
“In addition, growth in the cost of managing emergency admissions has been less than a third of the growth in demand.”
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/mar/02/nhs-england-too-many-patients-as-emergency-nao-warns
RDE declares crisis
Well, we didn’t see that one coming did we – after more than 200 of our community beds were closed.
How on earth do you “prioritise patients in currently in your care” when emergencies happen and when your next nearest large hospitals are 40-90 miles away and having their own crises?
Here’s an idea: have community hospitals and move dying, improving or rehabilitation patients closer to their homes, freeing up acute beds!
“The severity of today’s weather has resulted in the Royal Devon & Exeter Hospital declaring a status of ‘internal critical incident’.
The warning means that care is being prioritised to patients already in its care, and it is calling on all available staff to come in to work.
Pete Adey, RD&E chief operating officer, said: “Due to the adverse weather conditions the trust, earlier today, declared an internal critical incident. This means we are diverting all available staff and resources to provide care for the patients who are in the hospital and receiving care from our community teams.
“We are asking staff within walking distance of the RD&E’s main Wonford site to come in and provide help if it is safe for them to do so.
“As we expect the weather conditions to continue, our focus for the next 24 hours is to provide urgent and emergency services and to look after the patients already in our care.
“In view of the treacherous driving conditions, patients should only attend their booked appointments if it is safe to do so. Appointments for all of the patients who cannot reach the hospital and those we have needed to postpone in light of the weather conditions will be rescheduled as soon as possible.”
The RD&E advised Honiton Minor Injuries Unit will reopen at 9am tomorrow.
Tiverton and Exmouth MIUs are open as normal at this time but may be subject to change. Regular updates will be provided.
Mr Adey continued: “We sincerely thank the public for their help and support at this challenging time and pay tribute to our staff who are working incredibly hard to keep our essential urgent and emergency services running.”
https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/devon-hospital-declares-internal-critical-1285163
Privatisation: Network Rail assets likely to be sold off to billionaire equity funds
“Private equity firms, including Guy Hands’ Terra Firma, have emerged as contenders to take over Network Rail’s commercial property business, fuelling further dismay over the forced sale of assets to fund the budget shortfall.
The US investment giant Blackstone is understood to be another bidder for the rail property arm, which includes about 5,500 premises across England and Wales and is estimated to be worth £1.2bn.
According to Sky News, about 20 parties are expected to table preliminary bids on Friday, including Telereal Trillium, owned by the billionaire Pears family, and also funds linked to the Wall Street bank Goldman Sachs.
Much of the property is in urban areas under railway arches, and often let to small businesses such as bars, garages and hairdressers. The portfolio generated a large proportion of Network Rail’s total rental income of £293m in 2017. Network Rail has said existing tenants will retain their leases under the new landlords.
The involvement of Guernsey-based Terra Firma was revealed a month after a scathing report from the National Audit Office found the government had lost up to £4.2bn in a previous sell-off to part of Hands’ private equity group. The Ministry of Defence sold 57,400 army homes for military families for £1.66bn in 1997 to Annington Homes, and then rented them, which the public accounts committee chair, Meg Hillier, described as “a rotten deal for taxpayers”.
Terra Firma has also attracted attention for its management of the crisis-hit Four Seasons Health Care, whose care homes look after 17,000 elderly people in the UK and which is seeking a rescuer.
The sale of Network Rail assets, including some depots but no stations, was agreed as a condition of George Osborne (who was then the chancellor) releasing more funds in 2015 to continue promised infrastructure work. Network Rail hoped to raise £1.8bn towards a £2.5bn shortfall. A host of rail upgrades in a five-year plan from 2014-19 were cancelled after the budget for electrifying the Great Western mainline alone overran by approximately £2bn. …”
Unions and campaigners condemned the sale. Mick Cash, general secretary of the RMT union, said: “This is the same old bunch of chancers, speculators and asset strippers queuing up to make another killing at the expense of our public services. These property assets make a decent income for Network Rail and once they are gone they are gone, smashing another gaping hole in the rail infrastructure budget.” …
… Cat Hobbs, of the campaign group We Own It, said: “Railway land belongs to all of us – we don’t want it parcelled up and sold to the highest bidder. This is an asset which generates millions every year, money which should be returned to the public purse not disappear into private profits.”
Bovis pays out £10.5 m to repair sub-standard homes
“Profits at Bovis slumped last year after the housebuilder was forced to spend millions of pounds repairing poorly-built homes and fending off takeover attempts by rivals Galliford Try and Redrow.
The company was criticised after rushing the construction of some properties and offering customers cash to move into unfinished houses, some of which had plumbing and electrical problems.
The scandal has so far forced it to spend £10.5m on repairs, including £3.5m in 2017. Other one-off costs last year included £4m for restructuring and £2.8m on advisory fees as it tried to see off the takeover bids.
The charges dragged down Bovis’s annual pre-tax profits, which fell 26pc to £114m. Revenues dipped 3pc to around £1bn, despite a 7pc hike in its average selling price to £272,000.
The housebuilder’s previous chief executive David Ritchie resigned last January, just days before the quality scandal came to light, after Bovis was forced to issue a profit warning because it had struggled to build as many homes as expected in 2016. …”
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2018/03/01/bovis-profits-slump-35m-payout-botched-homes/
“Accountable Care” – if it walks like a duck …
BMA website link:
What are Accountable Care Organisations (ACOs)?
An ACO brings together a number of providers to take responsibility for the cost and quality of care for a defined population within an agreed budget.
The key feature of an ACO is that there will be a single contract with a single organisation for the majority of health and care services in the area.
The ACO contract holder would be responsible for the provision of services, but may not necessarily deliver all the services itself; it could instead hold sub-contracts with other providers.
This is our artistic impression.
http://999callfornhs.org.uk/nhs-cunning-linguists/4594220738
Danger of Exmouth’s “temporary” attractions
Letter in Exmouth Journal:
“There is very important meeting at the Town Hall on Tuesday 6th March at 10 am.
The future of Queens Drive is at stake. Do not be deceived by the description that the planning application is for 12 months only and is “temporary”.
Our Town Council has been bullied and harassed by EDDC paid officials and members of the Regeneration team to try and force this through using the threat of dereliction if they don’t get their way.
This plan reduces the play and recreation of this area to about a quarter. The bulk of the site is to be cheap food outlets and a big screen and spurious as yet unnamed and untested events. To this end to also force the issue EDDC has signed a contract for some play equipment and hired an events manager without consulting our elected representatives.
This area up to now has been protected by the Masterplan for Play and Recreation. Even in the wonderful, could now say fantastical, plans in Reserved Matters last year there is a huge area put aside for water play and other recreational activities. All this can now be lost forever if this so called “temporary attractions“ application goes through in its current form.
If you care about our Seafront, send someone to this meeting. We must stand up to bullying. We must stand up for democracy and above all we must continue to stand up for our lovely Seafront.
Sally Galsworthy, Exmouth”
The business rate retention scam
“Allowing English councils to retain more of their business rates revenue could lead to damaging shortfalls in funding and drive divisions between different areas, the Institute for Fiscal Studies has warned.
Councils that enjoy the biggest increases in such revenues are unlikely to be those with the biggest spending needs, the think tank said. Levelling the playing field by redistributing the money would address regional disparities but would undermine the goal of encouraging councils to use business rates to boost regional growth.
The government turned the business rates system on its head in 2013 as part of its devolution strategy, when local authorities were allowed to keep half of any real-term growth in revenues or bear half of any real-term fall. Until then, business rates were pooled by central government and distributed back to local authorities as grants.
Five years ago, the ambition was for councils to keep 100 per cent of the change from 2019. That has been revised down to 75 per cent from 2020. The idea was to give local authorities an incentive to boost their revenues and local economies by increasing commercial property development or by cutting rates to attract more business.
The IFS said that the plan may backfire and “lead to divergences in English councils’ funding without promoting growth”. Its analysis of councils’ revenues and spending since 2006 showed that the policy may be flawed.
“The report shows that significant divergences could arise in just a few years under 100 per cent rates retention,” the IFS said. “This is because those councils, which would have seen the biggest increases in their retained business rates revenues, were often not the councils that experienced the biggest increases in their relative spending needs, for example, because their population became older, poorer or sicker.
“It is also not clear that the incentives provided by rates retention will translate into faster economic growth. The report finds no relationship between changes in the councils’ business rates tax bases and local economic growth, or indeed employment or earnings growth, in recent years.”
David Phillips, associate director at the IFS, said: “Areas seeing lots of new developments aren’t guaranteed strong economic growth. And growth doesn’t necessarily rely on large-scale property development.”
Source: The Times (pay wall)
So, how is the “Misconduct in Public Office” consultation going?
Here’s the current state of play:
Click to access cp229_misconduct_in_public_office_summary.pdf
Here’s a summary:
Click to access cp229_misconduct_in_public_office_summary.pdf
Owl says: chances of reform – zero. Why: there is no will for change from a government that has too much to lose from such reforms!
Millenium baby boom coincides with school funding cuts in recipe for disaster
“… A baby boom in the 2000s created a “population bulge”.
Primary schools have been feeling the effects of this for years. Now, secondary applications are beginning to rise as children born during this population boom move up through the school system. …
… The increase in demand for school places has meant fewer pupils across England are being offered their first or any of their top choice schools – last year the proportion (83.5%) was the lowest since 2010. And more are being offered a school that they didn’t choose at all. …”
Privatisation: the Carillion Comedy Show!
This sounds like the sort of “comedy” Ricky Gervais might write! Except that these people were being paid hundreds of thousands if pounds while bringing the company to its knees.
“Carillion’s former chairman Philip Green had only a “tenuous grasp” on the crisis in the construction firm’s finances, and was working towards an “upbeat announcement” to the City just five days before unveiling a £845m writedown, board minutes of the collapsed group reveal.
The board also rejected advice from its brokers that the company would be unable to raise emergency funds, describing their pessimistic view as “not credible” and then hiring alternative advisers.
The details are contained within the company’s board minutes, which were released on Wednesday by a joint select committee investigating the construction group’s collapse in January.
The business, energy and industrial strategy (BEIS) committee, along with the work and pensions committee, have been publishing extracts of the official Carillion corporate record each day this week.
Frank Field, the chair of the work and pensions committee, said: “Carillion’s chair appeared to lack even a tenuous grasp on the reality of the company’s situation. Five days before the profit warning that heralded the firm’s public spiral into insolvency, Philip Green stands like the mayor of Pompeii – smoke billowing from the volcano behind him, lava cascading down the slopes – trumpeting the forthcoming revelries of the village fete. It is difficult to believe the chairman of the company was unaware of its position, but equally difficult to comprehend his assessment if he was.”
Rachel Reeves MP, the chair of the BEIS committee, added: “Philip Green’s assessment of Carillion as ‘a compelling and attractive proposition’ shows either a woeful lack of leadership or no grip on reality.”
The minutes of the board meeting of 5 July 2017 record Green, who had been chairman since 2014, stating that the company should continue to work “toward a positive and upbeat announcement for Monday [10 July], focusing on the strength of the business as a compelling and attractive proposition, and mentioning the self-help and disposal position”. Five days later, Carillion announced the £845m profit warning that marked the beginning of the company’s death spiral.
The meeting was also partly attended by Peter Moorhouse of the investment bank Morgan Stanley, which was an adviser to Carillion. He told the meeting that the bank was “not able to underwrite the proposed equity issue” and had withdrawn as sponsors.
The Carillion directors rejected his view, the minutes show, concluding that it had “discussed the rationale given by Mr Moorhouse, reflecting that it was not credible”.
Green did not return phone calls.”
“Parish [council] wins permission for judicial review over decision under delegated authority”
“A parish council has been granted permission to apply for judicial review in their challenge to a grant of planning permission by a district council under purported exercise of delegated authority, barristers’ chambers Francis Taylor Building (FTB) has reported.
FTB, whose Meyric Lewis is acting for Newton Longville Parish Council, said members at Aylesbury Vale District Council had resolved to grant planning permission for residential development “delegated to officers… subject to such conditions as are considered appropriate and to include a condition requiring that a reserved matters application be made within 18 months of the date of permission and that any permission arising from that application be implemented within 18 months”.
The set said that in exercising their delegated authority, officers took the view that there was insufficient justification for shortening the period for applying for reserved matters and for requiring implementation within 18 months. “But that matter was neither raised with members nor addressed in the delegated report published by the Council.”
FTB added that in committee, members had wished to impose these short timeframes “because they were concerned about the length of time that the site had remained undeveloped notwithstanding the existence of planning permission granted in 2007 and then renewed in 2011 and so they wished to encourage the building out of the site more swiftly than if longer timeframes were allowed”.
The set said permission to apply for judicial review had been granted by the High Court on the ground that the decision went beyond the terms of the delegated authority because it conflicted with the confined terms of the members’ resolution.
Permission was also granted on a ground concerning the related section 106 agreement and in respect of officers’ failure to provide adequate reasons, as required by under reg. 7 of the Openness of Local Government Bodies Regulations 2014, in that they did not address the matters relied on as justifying a departure from the terms of the members’ resolution in the delegated report.
The parish council has made representations based on the terms of the judge’s grant of permission to see if a full hearing can be avoided, FTB said.
Meyric Lewis is instructed by Bob McGeady of Ashtons KCJ.”
“Judge agrees costs capping in action over NHS accountable care organisations”
“Campaigners including scientist Professor Stephen Hawking have secured a costs order for their judicial review of the government’s planned creation of accountable care organisations (ACO) in the NHS.
In January the claimants gained permission to bring the case against Health and Social Care Secretary Jeremy Hunt and the National Health Service Commissioning Board.
Cheema-Grubb J held that the crowd funded campaign met the statutory test for a costs capping order, being a group of responsible individuals acting in the public interest without a personal interest in the outcome.
The campaigners will challenge the lawfulness of accountable care organisations, which they argue Parliament has not given the Department of Health the power to create.
During the January hearing the court declined to cap costs and the campaigners feared they could face a £450,000 bill were they to lose.
Cheema-Grubb J said it was highly likely that some of the concerns raised in the judicial review had a high degree of public interest and accepted evidence that the case would be dropped in the absence of a cost order.
The claimants could not be criticised for being unreasonable in not proceeding in a case with open-ended potential liabilities, the judge said.
She also noted that Mr Hunt and the NHS were publicly funded through taxpayers’ money in defending the case.
Under the order, if the campaigners lose their liability for Mr Hunt’s and the NHS’s costs would be capped at £80,000 each.
If they won, the two defendants’ liability to pay their costs would be capped at £115,000.”
New coastal communities fund open
“A further bidding round has opened for the government’s fund to promote regeneration and economic growth in coastal towns.
Successful projects in round 5 of the Coastal Communities Fund will share £40m among them. The money will be available to spend from April 2019 to March 2021.
The fund has allocated £174m to 295 projects since it began in 2012. It is for projects over £50,000 that will directly or indirectly lead to safeguarding and creating sustainable jobs.
Communities minister Jake Berry said: “Coastal communities up and down the country from Barrow-in-Furness to Brighton have been boosted by this funding which has spurred inward investment, sustainable growth, new jobs and exciting economic opportunities for local businesses.”
The fund has generated £8 for coastal area economies for every £1 invested, the minister said.
Successful projects have included a £1.95m grant to Cornwall to repair and re-launch the Grade II Listed Art Deco Jubilee Pool in Penzance as a year-round visitor attraction, a £2m allocation for Blackpool’s Lightpool project to improve its seafront Illuminations and Northumberland’s £1.8m award to turn Amble into a destination for devotees of seafood. …”
http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2018/02/coastal-communities-benefit-ps40m
Swire’s questions
Swire has put in another Parliamentary question about East Devon – this time saying wouldn’t it be a great idea if tourism could attract less VAT.
However, Owl isn’t printing it. It’s been asked before, appreciative noises made and, of course, nothing changed.
So why isn’t Owl more positive about Swire’s bid to help the East Devon economy?
Well, it’s coming up to local election time (though not in East Devon this year, the closest being Exeter) and ALL Tory MPs are (coincidentally, of course) popping up all over the country asking similarly closely-targeted questions in THEIR constituencies …..
Next question?
“Tory ministers decide not to spend £72 million set aside for affordable homes despite housing crisis The money will now be spent on building houses for sale worth up to £600,000”
“Tory ministers decided not to spend £72 million set aside to build affordable homes because it was “no longer required”, despite the housing crisis gripping Britain.
Communities Secretary Sajid Javid was forced to “surrender” the cash and send it back to the treasury, as part of £817 million his department failed to spend last year.
Some 115 million people are on council waiting lists in England, almost a quarter of whom are in London.
But a government memo, explaining the department’s underspend to the Treasury, states: “Part of the funding allocation for the Affordable Housing programme has not been required in 2017/18.”
The document also notes that the £817 million figure – much of which would have been intended for social or affordable homes – will now be spent on funding the Help to Buy programme.
In 2016-17, just 41,530 affordable homes were built, the second lowest figure for a decade.
The majority of affordable homes are so-called ‘affordable rent’, where the monthly rent is set at up to 80% of private market rent.
The number of cheaper, “social rent” houses built each year has plummeted from 39,560 in 2010-11 – the year the new “affordable rent” definition was introduced – to just 5,380 last year.
Labour’s Shadow Housing Secretary, John Healey said: “Feeble ministers are selling families short by surrendering much-needed cash for new homes.
“If the Secretary of State can’t defend his Department’s Budget from the Treasury he should give the job to someone who can.”
A DCLG spokesperson said: “We are delivering the homes our country needs and since 2010 we have built over 357,000 new affordable properties.
“But we are determined to do more and we are investing a further £9bn, including £2bn to help councils and housing associations build social rent homes where they are most needed.”
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/tory-ministers-decide-not-spend-12098770
Are EDDC Tory councillors having broadband problems?
Written Answers – Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport: Broadband: East Devon (26 Feb 2018)
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2018-02-07.127464.h&s=speaker%3A11265#g127464.q0
Hugo Swire: To ask the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, what estimate his Department has made of the number of homes that have access to superfast broadband in East Devon.
Written Answers – Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport: Broadband: East Devon (26 Feb 2018)
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2018-02-07.127464.h&s=speaker%3A11265#g127465.q1
Hugo Swire: To ask the Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, what estimate his Department has made of the number of businesses that have access to superfast broadband in East Devon.
“east devon” : 1 Written Answer
===============================
Written Answers – Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport: Broadband: East Devon (26 Feb 2018)
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2018-02-07.127464.h&s=%22east+devon%22#g127464.r0
Margot James: According to Thinkbroadband, currently 90.02% of premises in *East Devon* can access superfast broadband. This is up from 9.4% in 2012. DCMS does not hold data on broadband coverage which distinguishes between homes and businesses.
“The plan to cut MPs looks suspiciously like a power grab”
“Are we witnessing a power grab?
Six months ago, reports suggested that the Prime Minister had dropped plans to force through a cut in MPs, a cut linked with the ongoing review of constituency boundaries.
It turns out there has been a u-turn on the u-turn, with news emerging that the PM is set to reduce the number of MPs.
That’s despite the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee warning that moves to cut numbers to 600 are unlikely to secure the backing of MPs.
But why the fuss?
The issue comes down to a very ill-thought plan for new constituencies – alongside some clear democratic dangers when it comes to reducing voters’ representation.
The cut in MPs actually represents a cut in backbenchers if there are no plans to cap/cut the size of the executive or ‘payroll vote’ correspondingly.
Parliament will gain more powers after Brexit yet will have less capacity to scrutinise legislation. At the same time voters lose their representatives in Europe. That places a greater burden on the Commons and a lack of capacity poses significant risks.
The democratic dangers are clear. ERS research in 2016 showed that in a smaller, 600-seat Commons, nearly one in four (23%) MPs would be on the government payroll if the parties’ proportion of MPs – and the total number of ministers and whips – stayed the same – an all-time high, and up from the 21% at present (figures as of November 2016).
The more you look at it, the more cutting backbenchers at the same as bolstering the executive looks to many like a worrying power-grab.
But there’s another factor – the unelected Lords. It’s just common sense that the cut in democratically elected representatives cannot go ahead while the House of Lords remains the second largest chamber in the world, with around 800 members.
If the government are concerned about reducing the cost of politics, they would do well to deal with the over-sized second chamber.
Voters need real representation in the Commons to provide the essential scrutiny and capacity we need: both for now and when we gain new powers after Brexit.
But there are problems with the boundary changes regardless of the cut in MPs. For a start, the new boundaries will be based on highly incomplete as well as out of date data. For example, people who registered to vote for the EU referendum won’t be counted for the new boundaries – skewing representation.
At the same time, the government has set an arbitrary 5% maximum difference in the size of the new constituencies. That risks awkwardly splitting up communities or grafting very different towns/counties onto each other – just look at the controversial Devonwall proposals.
Finally, unregistered but eligible voters are not being considered when drawing up these constituency boundaries – even though they will still need support and representation from their MP. This disadvantages poorer constituencies – they end up with lower representation, often despite greater need.
Far from reducing political representation and weakening voters’ voices, the Prime Minister should cancel the proposed cut in MPs – and move forward with fair boundaries based on a properly resourced Commons.
Read the ERS’ full views on the boundary changes here:
https://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/campaigns/upgrading-our-democracy/fair-boundaries/ and here https://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/cutting-the-number-of-mps-will-have-consequences-lets-get-this-right/
