East Devon Alliance Public Meeting on hospital bed cuts

EDA Public Meeting
Saturday, 18th March at 4.30,
Colyford Memorial Hall

Independents’ Way Forward on Hospital Beds

Speakers:

Claire Wright
fresh from her success on the DCC Health Scrutiny Committee,
together with the Independent East Alliance candidates for

Seaton and Colyton (Martin Shaw)
Axminster (Paul Hayward)
Sidmouth (Paul Arnott)

and

Leader of the EDA, Cllr Cathy Gardner,

to discuss the next steps in the fight for our community hospital beds and to save the NHS in Devon from widespread cuts.

When nuclear reactors go bad

“Cleaning up the plant, scene of the world’s worst nuclear disaster since Chernobyl after it was struck by a magnitude-9 earthquake and tsunami on the afternoon of 11 March 2011, is expected to take 30 to 40 years, at a cost Japan’s trade and industry ministry recently estimated at 21.5tr yen ($189bn).

The figure, which includes compensating tens of thousands of evacuees, is nearly double an estimate released three years ago.”

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/mar/09/fukushima-nuclear-cleanup-falters-six-years-after-tsunami

Councils to administer a discretionary business rate relief fund

“Local authorities are to share a £300m pot for discretionary business rate reliefs to help firms facing higher bills due to next month’s revaluation of the levy, chancellor Philip Hammond has announced.”

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2017/03/councils-share-ps300m-business-rate-relief-fund

Question: How will this be monitored to ensure that officers and councillors do not favour their mates?

How to make electoral registration easier (if your electoral registration officer plays fair)

Owl is not convinced that this government or even EDDC – wants a more inclusive electoral register – students were mostly against Brexit and they often vote for minority parties.

It will be interesting to see what efforts our electoral registration officer (CEO Mark Williams) will make to ensure that East Devon registers more voters – after the fiasco at the last election, where frantic efforts had to be made at the last-minute to find 6,000 voters who had dropped off the electoral roll due to changes in procedures authorised by Mr Williams but which very much displeased the parliamentary committee to which he was summoned to explain his unilateral changes.

“Before the Lords voted against Brexit yesterday in the House of Lords, the government was defeated on another important democratic issue: voter registration. This passed largely without comment by the media (and went unmentioned in the BBC’s Yesterday in Parliament, for example). It is unsurprising that voter registration rarely receives the same level of coverage as Brexit, but it is nonetheless a vital issue.

Up to 8 million people were thought to be missing from the electoral register in 2015. Research shows that citizens were turned away from the polls at the Brexit referendum because they were not registered to vote.

Registration levels have been declining for a long time. It was long forecasted that this decline would continue under individual electoral registration (IER). The introduction of online voter registration and voter outreach work from organisations such as Bite the Ballot did much to address this in the run-up to the EU referendum. But now the referendum is past, we should expect the completeness of the register to slide away again.

One group that research predicted would be hardest hit was students. Under the old household electoral registration system, they were automatically enrolled by their university administration. Although data on the number who have fallen off the register is hard to track, we know that young people were especially affected by IER. It was therefore a mistake that the Electoral Administration Act of 2013 did not provide for a suitable student registration to be put in place when the old system of household registration was abolished.

Yesterday, an amendment to the Higher Education and Research Bill was introduced to require universities to offer students the opportunity to register to vote at the point of enrolment or re-registration as a student at their university. A successful example of a scheme like this was piloted at Sheffield University, where student registration rates soared to a quoted 76% of its eligible students registered, compared to 13% at similar-sized institutions. The amendment offers an opportunity to save significant funds too. The head of registration services at Sheffield Council has confirmed that the cost of registering a student with this model is just 12p, rather than £5. Cardiff Council calculates that using this scheme for combining enrolment with electoral registration has saved it some £63,000.

The amendment was passed, against the government, by a majority of 200 to 189.

Beyond students: towards a more inclusive democracy

The principle behind the amendment is a simple and powerful one. Make voter registration easy and convenient and more people will register. If you combine registration with other administrative jobs, such as paying council tax or renewing a driving licence, the paperwork-adverse citizen will be more likely to complete it. It is important that measures therefore go beyond supporting student registration and that the idea is extended to other public services to engage the wider public.

There is a powerful research and international practice to suggest that this works. In the US, a federal Act was passed in the 1990s to expand the number of locations and opportunities whereby eligible citizens could apply to register to vote. In particular, citizens were to be given a voter registration application when they applied for or renewed a driver’s licence (hence it became known as the ‘Motor Voter Act’), or when applying for (or receiving) services at certain other public offices. Nearly one third of registrations are submitted in the US at motor vehicle agencies. Some studies suggest it raised turnout by around 2 percentage points and some have argued that the results could have been even better with improved implementation.

Support for making registration easier dates back to 2014, when a select committee report on Voter Engagement proposed making it automatic. This became the basis of some party manifestos. There is now a growing cross-party consensus about a set of measures that could be used to address the problem of the Missing Millions, with a report on the issue published last year and backed by members of all political parties in Westminster. After all the divisions the Brexit debate has opened up, the effort to build a complete and inclusive democracy is more important than ever before. …”

http://www.democraticaudit.com/2017/03/08/now-theyre-on-a-roll-how-to-get-the-missing-millions-onto-the-electoral-register/

“Grumpy Old Man Political Party” abolished

“The Electoral Commission maintains the official register of political parties and regularly culls defunct entries from it.

Amongst the parties removed from the list in the latest updates were:

British Unicorn Party, who wanted to abolish BBC South East Today, soared to four group members on Facebook and whose founder issued death threats to magistrates.

The Grumpy Old Men Political Party, whose policies included creating Whack a Munchkin day and restoring not only corporal punishment but also the death penalty.

Everyone’s Party, which possibly inaccurately called itself on Facebook, “The Largest Political Party On The Planet” (84 likes at last time of checking).

Kitten Independence Party, which intended to stand Sheena Gael Hunt in Torbay in the 2015 general election but did not manage it. It alas never registered a party logo.”

http://www.markpack.org.uk/148702/british-unicorn-party/

It’s best to live in Surrey if you want favours from the government

“Philip Hammond was among a series of Conservative MPs who lobbied on behalf of Surrey county council in a row over social care funding, correspondence released under freedom of information laws has shown, reviving claims the council received a special deal from ministers.

Hours after Theresa May insisted at prime minister’s questions that Surrey had enjoyed no preferential treatment, one of the released letters and emails showed the chancellor had spoken to the communities secretary, Sajid Javid, on the council’s behalf.

Hammond, who represents the Surrey constituency of Runnymede and Weybridge, wrote to the council’s deputy leader, Peter Martin, in September to sympathise about funding difficulties, saying he would “take this up with Sajid Javid”.

The correspondence shows that another Surrey MP, Jonathan Lord, wrote to the council in November saying he had discussed the issue with Javid and “he’s doing something for us”.

In an email to the council’s leader David Hodge and fellow Surrey Tory MPs in January, Lord suggested Javid might have “£40m hidden under the departmental sofa” for the council, and suggested other councils’ budgets could be trimmed to help.

The correspondence, released following a freedom of information request from the BBC, follows a long and public standoff between by the Conservative-run council and Javid’s department over what Hodge said was a funding gap to pay for social care.

Hodge promised to hold a referendum of Surrey residents on imposing a 15% rise in council tax to make up the shortfall. However, last month this was called off at the last moment.

Leaked text messages passed to Labour last month prompted Jeremy Corbyn to accuse May at prime minister’s questions of buying off Surrey with a special deal, something she denied.

Following the release of a recording in which Hodge told fellow Surrey Conservatives about a “gentleman’s agreement” with ministers, Corbyn reiterated the accusation at PMQs on Wednesday. May again denied Surrey had received special treatment.

The new documents show a concerted lobbying effort by Surrey MPs, among them Hammond. Other Surrey MPs to lobby for the council included Chris Grayling, the transport secretary, Michael Gove, Crispin Blunt and Dominic Raab, the correspondence showed.

It also highlights the extent of anger felt by Hodge over the funding issue. In one letter, he accuses Javid of “some seriously muddled thinking”, and warns of the political consequences if an agreement is not reached. “We will see the largest Conservative group in the country pitted against a Conservative government, and we will be blunt about where we think the blame lies,” he warned.

Writing to Hodge, Hammond had said: “I recognise the challenges you are facing in Surrey, and the apparently harsh treatment that the funding formula delivers, and I will take this up with Sajid Javid.”

An email from Lord in November suggested Javid and Hammond were seeking to help the council. “I have spoken to Sajid J, and he says he’s doing something for us,” Lord wrote. “Won’t be drawn on exactly what. Says that Philip H is being supportive and will be signing off on things for us.”

But a subsequent email from Lord in January said he was “extremely unimpressed” Javid had not “come up with the goods”.

He wrote: “If Saj was imprudent enough to not have £40m hidden under the departmental sofa just for this sort of emergency/problem/‘outlier’ emerging from his department’s draft settlement, then I assume, if he is a man of his word, that he must have done his best to put a strong case to the Trreasury

“If all his local government settlement money is really allocated, if the Treasury is refusing to help out, and if he can’t find a pot of money for the ‘missing’ learning disability grants, then Saj still has the option of adjusting all the other council settlements down very slightly in order to accommodate the £31m needed for Surrey – and I think he should be encouraged to do this.”

The shadow communities secretary, Teresa Pearce, said May should “come clean” over the deal. “Despite Theresa May’s claims to the contrary, this is more evidence of the Tories’ secret deal with the leadership of Surrey county council,” she said.

“We need full disclosure of the terms of the deal and reassurance that all councils will be treated the same way, not just the lucky few the Tories favour.”

However, a government spokesman said the discussions were nothing exceptional.

“As we have repeatedly made clear, there was no special deal for Surrey county council and they will not receive any extra funding that would not otherwise be provided or offered to other councils. To imply the opposite is simply untrue,” he said.

Javid’s department discussed funding settlements “with councils across the country, of all types and all political parties”, he added. “This happens every year, involves councils making representations to the government, and has always been the process.”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/mar/08/philip-hammond-among-mps-lobbying-for-surrey-county-council-in-funding-row

How does ex-Chancellor Osborne manage …?

“George Osborne has declared a salary of £650,000 a year for working just four days a month at BlackRock, the world’s biggest fund management firm, as well as almost £800,000 for speeches to financiers.”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/mar/08/george-osborne-to-be-paid-650000-for-working-one-day-a-week-blackrock-salary

He REALLY needs that MP’s salary …

Chancellor Philip Hammond – property developer

“The property development company owned by Chancellor Philip Hammond has warned of Britain’s critical shortage of construction workers just weeks before the Brexit negotiations many fear will prevent crucial EU migrant workers coming to the UK.

Hammond privately owns care-home builder Castlemead, which admitted in its recently filed financial accounts that the building industry was “suffering from supply bottlenecks, particularly of skilled tradespeople, driving up costs”.

Separately, a construction investment company he owns called Chiswell (Moorgate) said in its filings: “The scarcity of good quality and committed subcontractors is still an issue.” …

… The Chancellor has not been involved in running his businesses since 2010, owning them through a family trust, but it is believed he is kept abreast of the situation they face.

Directors Richard Shackleton and Joe O’Donnell declined to comment.

Chiswell’s accounts statement was signed off on December 21 while Castlemead’s was dated July 29, a month after the Brexit referendum.

Despite the labour shortages, Hammond’s companies staged a significant bounceback from losses the year before.

Castlemead revealed the property market is so improved it was planning to return to housebuilding after several years out of the “speculative” residential market. …

… Hammond has in the past received a dividend of £1.8 million from the companies. … “

http://www.standard.co.uk/business/building-firms-owned-by-the-chancellor-voice-labour-worries-as-brexit-talks-near-a3484406.html

Cranbrook having a few problems with its young people?

From the town council website:

“We are saddened that due to disrespectful behaviour at the Cranbrook Youth Space yesterday evening (7 March), the session will be closed on 21 March with the Youth Genesis Team providing a presence on the streets. The Cranbrook Youth Space will be open again on Tuesday 28 March for the final session before the Easter Holiday.”

All Seaton and Colyton GPs slam bed closures

“Seaton and Colyton GPs condemn hospital bed closures

The GPs at Seaton and Colyton Medical Practice and Townsend House Surgery have expressed their dismay at the decision to axe all inpatient beds at Seaton Hospital.

They say the closure, as part of the latest round of health economies by New Devon CCG, is a cruel blow to the Axe Valley.

In a statement issued this week they told The Herald: “Since the earlier closure of Axminster, Seaton Hospital represents the only inpatient facility for residents of both towns.

“Coupled with the loss of Honiton Hospital, Sidmouth hospital has the only beds to cover the eastern part of Devon.

“Bed shortages this winter have seen The Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital running at crisis levels so this policy seems misplaced as a way of reducing costs.

“The future plans of care in the community, with carers covering the most vulnerable in their own houses, undervalues the level and complexity of care that is offered as an inpatient and ignores the fact that there is a current shortage of qualified staff.

“End of life patients who cannot be supported at home may now end up admitted miles away from family and friends.

“Sadly, quality of care is steadily being eroded, and it is our most vulnerable patients who will be affected most by this closure.

“Challenging the decision seems futile as the alternative will be closure of Sidmouth Hospital and similar arguments will apply.

“It is the decision to focus on bed closures that needs contesting.”

http://www.midweekherald.co.uk/news/seaton_and_colyton_gps_condemn_hospital_bed_closures_1_4921391

This is how fast our community hospitals can close

And, my, is it FAST if this Torbay timetable is anything to go by:

http://www.devonlive.com/dates-when-south-devon-community-hospitals-will-stop-taking-patients-announced/story-30188317-detail/story.html

“Greater Exeter”: concerns voiced

With Cranbrook pretty much now considered an Exeter suburb maybe East Devon should be voicing its concerns.

” … speaking at a [Mid Devon] full council meeting on Wednesday, February 22, Liberal Councillor Jenny Roach who represents Silverton expressed fears that Mid Devon District Council would be ceding powers.

She said: “We’re looking like we could be ceding power to this planning partnership, and I know people will shake their heads and say no, but there are several points which worry me.

“Exeter needs land and you can imagine where I sit in my ward, Exeter City Council could be looking at developing the swathe of land that is between Silverton and Exeter and similarly between Thorverton and Newton St Cyres. If you look at the East Devon side there are huge estates marching across that land, so this worries me.

“It worries me that it’s being done by degree and almost by stealth. When we went to the public to talk about the sort of governance the district wanted, they didn’t like the cabinet, but unfortunately we didn’t get the 3000 signatures we needed in that period of time.

“There are a tremendous amount of people who were not happy with the governance of this authority as it is now, they don’t like the cabinet system, and it is the cabinet system that is sleepwalking us into a unitary authority.

“I’ve seen this happen before and I would really like to know that the very least we would do is have a state of the district debate on this Greater Strategic Exeter Plan.”

Councillor Nikki Woollatt, Independent for Cullompton North added: “Members of the public may well see this as a step towards unitary. To reassure everybody, I don’t think there’s any problem with having a consultation with the public prior to ceding any powers that we have held.

“People are going to start putting two and two together and if we’re open and say we will consult, I think that would be for the benefit of the public.”

Councillor Polly Colthorpe, Conservative for Way expressed concerns regarding the name.

She said: “The name of this outfit is misleading and I do think that it would be helpful it weren’t called the Greater Exeter Strategic Plan because it makes the whole of the rest of the districts which are involved, subordinate to Exeter.

“None of those districts will want that and they don’t see it like that and I think it would be helpful if you could perhaps consider giving it another title.”

http://www.devonlive.com/council-leaders-welcome-plans-to-work-together-for-greater-exeter-strategic-plan/story-30188639-detail/story.html

Rural? Depending on rural care? Probably best to forget it

Are Ottery, Honiton, Axminster and Seaton now classed as “rural communities” now they have no hospital beds, along with villages?

http://www.rsnonline.org.uk/press-releases/shortage-of-rural-doctors-puts-patients-health-at-risk

http://www.rsnonline.org.uk/services/rural-social-care-is-underfunded-–-network

http://www.rsnonline.org.uk/services/communities-blighted-by-patchy-rural-services

http://www.rsnonline.org.uk/analysis/are-rural-carers-overwhelmed-by-need

Hospital care at home? Are you sure that’s what is best?

“… In community health nursing, there has been a 12% drop overall in full-time equivalent staffing numbers since September 2009, despite growing demand.

In the East Midlands, district nurse Mary Black says her team and other colleagues are struggling to cope, because of a mixture of unfilled vacancies, maternity leave and long-term sickness absence, which directly affect patient care. “We firefight every single day: moving patient visits, ringing round to see if other teams can help, and we often have to cancel or defer. We have bank and agency nurses to cover vacancies, but not usually sickness or maternity leave, so it means the staff who are left have lots more visits to do each day,” she says. “There is no continuity, as often there’s a different agency nurse each day and there are a lot of duties and patient visits that an agency nurse can’t do, so the complex patients fall to our permanent members of the team. Agency staff often cancel at the last minute and sometimes don’t turn up.”

Black says: “It often feels like we’re not giving our patients a very good service, we cannot spend the time with them that they often need. Incidents and complaints will have risen.”

Last month’s report on the public sector workforce by the Reform thinktank is blunt about the impact of staffing problems. “Public services fail when employees fail,” it concludes. “This is the dramatic lesson from a number of high-profile errors in recent public service delivery. In many instances, quality is compromised, not because of individual incompetence, but the way the workforce is structured and organised. …

… “When you don’t have the right staff levels, we have to see patients on a prioritised basis,” he says. “Patients don’t get the quality and sometimes it means people get sub-optimal outcomes. It’s frustrating and demoralising.” Some of his colleagues have voted with their feet: leaving for private sector jobs with better work-life balance, or moving somewhere with lower house prices. “They are on the same money as it’s nationally done but the property prices are different,” Davies says. In the South-West, the shortages are particularly acute for more junior grades. “It tends to be easier to recruit more senior physios as they are a band up so the pay is better but it still can be an issue getting the right people down to us.”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/mar/08/uk-social-care-crisis-staff-shortages

Independent DCC Councillor Claire Wright does what ALL our local MPs failed to do

IF ONLY SHE HAD BECOME OUR MP! DIVIANI AGAIN VOTED AGAINST REASSESSMENT OF THE PLANS! LET’S MAKE SURE CLAIRE WRIGHT IS RE-ELECTED AS DCC COUNCILLOR IN MAY, ALONG WITH ANY OTHER TRULY INDEPENDENT CANDIDATES – AND FEEL VERY GRATEFUL THAT DIVIANI IS NOT STANDING FOR DCC AGAIN!

A decision to halve the remaining hospital beds in Eastern Devon will be referred to the Secretary of State for Health, unless a raft of assurances are provided.

A review of all community hospital bed closures across Devon since 2014, will also take place, including examining the role of social care.

I made the proposal at Devon County Council’s health and wellbeing scrutiny committee this afternoon and it was voted through by seven votes to five.

Last week, Northern, Eastern and Western Devon Clinical Commissioning Group (NEW Devon CCG) made a decision to close 71 beds at Whipton, Okehampton, Honiton and Seaton Hospitals, retaining beds at Exmouth, Tiverton and Sidmouth.

Their proposal had previously been to retain beds at Seaton and close beds at Sidmouth, but the CCG’s governing body decided to shut beds at Seaton instead of Sidmouth for demographic reasons.

Following today’s health and wellbeing scrutiny committee meeting 14 assurances will now need to be provided by the CCG on its decision within 28 days, which the committee will examine in its new form after the elections on 4 May.

If the assurances are insufficient or inadequate, the decision to close 72 beds will be referred to the Secretary of State for Health.

From my own personal perspective it seemed to me that the four members of the CCG – Laura Nicholas – Director of Strategy, Rob Sainsbury – chief operating officer, Janet Fitzgerald – chief officer, and Dr Simon Kerr – GP from Ottery St Mary, who attended today were trying to convince the committee that the care at home system was going to work, but it was clear that they themselves had doubts.

At one point Laura Nicholas said: “We are very cautiously optimistic that the new model of care can be implemented.”

I asked the following questions:
– How much money will be saved? Answer: Between £2 and £5m

– How many more staff will you need? Answer: This will be variable and it depends. We are working these issues through (I had previously been told by the CCG chair, Tim Burke, that there may be around double the number of staff required for the new care at home scheme)

– How many objections were there out of the more than 2000 consultation responses received?
Answer: Cannot say. I then asked about an approximate percentage, but this couldn’t be given either.

– When are you going to implement the bed cuts? Answer: We don’t know yet. When we are confident that the new model of care is ready

– Sir Simon Stevens announcement last week about NHS England ensuring that health trusts must demonstrate that sufficient alternative provision is there before any future bed cuts are made. Are you confident that if this guidance was in place now you would be able to meet it? Answer: We will ensure the new model of care is ready before any bed cuts are made.

But… the decision to close the beds has already been made!

Chairman, Richard Westlake asked about the future of hospitals that would have their beds removed. But was told there was no hospital buildings identified for closure. It was that the beds were being removed.

Yet in the CCG papers I read last autumn it made it very clear that some hospital buildings would be deemed surplus to requirements and be sold.

Of course NHS Property Services now owns all community hospital buildings in the Eastern Devon area and is already charging its hefty commercial rents ……

We heard from three members of the public including Paul Hayward, Mayor of Axminster, who is concerned about the decision to close beds at Seaton, which will affect Axminster residents, who lost their beds at the same time as Ottery’s in 2015.

We also heard from Cllr Jack Rowland from Seaton Town Council who argued similar points to Paul Hayward and Philip Wearne, a north Devon hospital services campaigner.

Cllr Hayward had carried out some research and found that Devon County Council’s own statistics on demographics were at odds with those published by NEW Devon CCG last week to justify keeping Sidmouth’s beds open instead of Seaton’s.

He and Cllr Rowland also expressed concerns about travel distances to the nearest community hospital.

And to complicate matters, Northern Devon Healthcare Trust has just announced temporary closure of all Holsworthy Hospital’s beds due to staffing shortages and apparent low bed occupancy levels.

The difficulty is that during the consultation the CCG had advised that people from the Okehampton area would be referred to Holsworthy Hospital for inpatient care. Something that they cannot now deliver on.

Cllr Barry Parsons made a compelling case for why this decision was quite wrong and how upset the people of Holsworthy are.

Cllr Kevin Ball from Okehampton expressed his dissatisfaction with the consultation process which he viewed as unfair and how the loss of Holsworthy Hospital’s beds will negatively affect any alternative provision in Okehampton.

The CCG said they would do further work in Okehampton on this.

Caroline Chugg proposed that the committee should recommend no bed closures should take place until there was sufficient alternative provision in place.

Finally, the CCG’s own health scrutiny paperwork admitted that this following damning staff response was a theme (p71): – http://democracy.devon.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=130&MId=1981&Ver=4

“The potential financial savings of the proposed changes have not been clearly established and the actual costs of replacing hospital based care with community based care are not even estimated. The existing hospital nursing staff have not been consulted on their willingness to transfer to a very different pattern of working. Many of them are very concerned about the professional vulnerability that this presents and, at a time when there are many vacancies both in the NHS and through agencies, they are not likely to simply accept a situation that they do not see as professionally or personally secure.

“ Assurance was given that no hospital beds will be closed before the staff are in place for Care at Home. But assurance also needs to be given to local hospitals now, potentially blighted, to stay open, or staff will walk.”

Managers say that bed closures will affect only 20 patients a week, but this is over 1000 patients a year plus their visitors who may need to travel further to visit.

I have to say that I cannot fully blame NEW Devon CCG for this hopelessly rushed and poorly thought out decision. They are under the cosh of the government’s Success Regime as one of three most financially challenged health areas in the country.

The Success Regime exists as a hatchet programme of cuts because of the projected deficit of £384m by 2020/21.

My understanding is that this deficit is largely caused by a growing elderly population in Devon with complex health needs, combined with a reduction in the annual growth funding from government, which has dropped from around six per cent to around 1 per cent in the past seven years.

My proposal was put to the vote and was immediately objected to by Cllr Jerry Brook, who claimed it was ‘pre-determined’ because I had typed it out and given it to officers beforehand.

He was reminded by the chairman that this was common practice.

The votes were seven votes to five in favour. Voting in favour (I believe) were: Me, Caroline Chugg, Andy Boyd, Emma Morse, Brian Greenslade, Robin Julian and George Gribble.

Voting against (I believe) were: Jerry Brook, Paul Diviani, Chris Clarence, Debo Sellis and Rufus Gilbert.

The issue will be pursued again after the elections on 4 May.

Here is the motion (it was altered in committee so may appear slightly differently in the minutes but this is the essence):

This committee:

1) Objects to the decision by NEW Devon CCG to reduce the number of community hospital beds in Eastern Devon from 143 to 72

2) Resolves to refer the decision to the Secretary of State for Health on the following grounds if adequate assurances are not given on the points below:

a) It is not in the in the interests of the health service in the area
b) The consultation is flawed

3) Agrees to conduct a review of community hospital bed closures made across Devon since 2014 to establish the effectiveness of the replacement home care, including examining the role of social care

Notes relating to 2 above:
– That no beds are closed before there is sufficient alternative provision

– There is no clear explanation of what care at home will look like or work and this model has frequently been mixed up with Hospital at Home which is entirely different

– There may not be adequate care available in people’s homes, given the staffing shortages in the NHS, and the significant difficulties in adult social care

– That Hospiscare reported in its consultation response to the bed closure proposals that during 2015 managers reported 58 incidents to the CCG where the breakdown of social care packages for people at end of life had caused distress. All of these people had wanted to be cared for at home

– There are no clear answers on how many more staff are required to make the new model of care work. And that there are shortages in many health professional disciplines

– Despite a significant budget deficit, there is no clear financial saving to be made. In fact once the new model of care is in place the savings may be extremely small

– That there is no clear plan on the future of hospital buildings that have lost their beds and are now in the ownership of NHS Property Services

– The new government direction that will come into effect next month which mean health trusts will need to prove that there is sufficient alternative provision before any beds close

– Okehampton and Honiton Hospitals were excluded from the consultation process

– The temporary closure of Holsworthy Hospital beds which is where Okehampton patients were to be referred

– The ongoing and significant pressure on the RD&E hospital beds and difficulty with discharge

– Doubt over the soundness of the data relating to the decision retain Sidmouth Hospital’s beds over Seaton’s

– Staff appear to be opposed to the plans

– Closure of many care homes

The link to the webcast is here – https://devoncc.public-i.tv/core/portal/webcast_interactive/268434

http://www.claire-wright.org/index.php/post/hospital_bed_cuts_to_be_referred_to_secretary_of_state_for_health_unless_ra

Hinkley C at risk if UK pulls out of Euratom as ministers want

“The legal logic behind the UK’s planned exit from a key European nuclear group has been called into question by experts who have branded the risky move an unnecessary step in the Brexit process.

The Government said it will leave Euratom as a result of the decision to exit the EU because “they are uniquely legally joined” but the justification has been rubbished by experts who say there is no legal reason the UK cannot remain within Euratom while leaving the bloc.

Herbert Smith Freehills, the law firm advising EDF on the Hinkley Point C new nuclear project, said the Government’s legal interpretation has created unnecessary risks.

Leaving Euratom’s regulatory framework could delay the planned Hinkley Point and Horizon nuclear plants while complicated new bilateral agreements are formed. It could also bring imports of nuclear fuel to an immediate halt, which lead to a shutdown of existing nuclear power reactors which make up a fifth of the UK’s electricity supply.

Julia Pyke, a partner at Herbert Smith Freehills and the firm’s lead adviser to EDF, told the Daily Telegraph the risk is “an own goal”.

“The balance of legal opinion is that it’s not legally necessary to exit Euratom in order to leave the EU,” she said. …

… Tom Greatrex, chief executive of the Nuclear Industry Association and a former shadow energy minister, said the sector has made it crystal clear that it would prefer to maintain membership of Euratom.

“However, if the UK ceases to be part of Euratom, then it is vital that the Government agree transitional arrangements, to give the UK time to negotiate and complete new agreements. The UK should remain a member of Euratom until these arrangements are put in place,” he urged.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/03/07/hinkley-advisers-slam-euratom-exit-legal-goal/

“Surrey council leader ‘had gentleman’s agreement’ with ministers”

David Hodge, the leader of Surrey council, told Conservative colleagues that he had secured a “gentleman’s agreement” with senior cabinet ministers that persuaded him to cancel a threat to raise council tax by 15%.

In a secret recording of a Conservative group meeting on 7 February, the politician revealed there had been a “series of conversations” with the communities secretary, Sajid Javid, in a car outside Downing street, followed by a second meeting with the chancellor, Philip Hammond.

Hodge told those in the room not to email or tweet any details as he shared details of meetings that appeared to take place between an MP acting as an intermediary and the cabinet members.

He said the MP was “looking for assurances, looking for clarification, looking for help basically on how we could stop the referendum” from Javid in the car.

“He [the MP] then went inside and spoke to the chancellor – I think I can say that. He went inside and spoke to the chancellor, his spad was waiting – spad being his political whatever they call it [special adviser] – he was with him and then the spad rang me with what we can and cannot say,” Hodge added, according to a transcript of the meeting passed to the Guardian.

Hodge implied that the outcome of the meeting was for him to withdraw the decision to push for a referendum that day, which would allow the council to raise the tax to 15%, and instead stick with the 4.99% allowed without asking voters for permission.

The question over whether Surrey was subject to a sweetheart deal was raised in the House of Commons by the Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, a day later, on 8 February after he received leaked texts from Hodge that suggested an agreement had been reached.

But this recording goes much further – with Hodge talking about his major worries about finances, particularly disability funding. He talked about the government pushing forward with some form of funding review.

“We’ve agreed this morning that, subject to them agreeing, that if it’s possible, we will become part of that process going forward,” he said, before adding that he was not giving up the fight over disability funding or the Better Care Fund for social care.

“We listened carefully to the information that was being relayed back to us from government. Yes, on one hand Tony is absolutely right, we should get something in writing. But on the other hand I do actually have something in writing, that Helen knows I have in writing, Sir Paul Beresford knows I have in writing, which gives me a certain amount of comfort but I’m not going to release that information for obvious reasons,” he added.

“There may come a time that if what I call gentleman’s agreements, that the Conservative party often does, are not honoured, we will have to revisit this in nine months or a year’s time. If we do, let me assure you, you’ll have to drag me kicking and screaming not to go for a referendum next year.”

The shadow communities minister, Gareth Thomas, said: “Sajid Javid and Philip Hammond should come to the House of Commons and explain what the gentleman’s agreement that they’ve done – explain why they are offering it to Surrey council and not the rest of English councils trying to manage budgets that are at tipping point.”

The meeting of the council’s Conservative group took place on a Tuesday, the same day that the council announced plans to cancel the referendum. The issue was then raised by Corbyn at prime minister’s questions in the House of Commons the next day following texts referring to a “memorandum of understanding” between the government and council.

A day later, on Thursday 9 February, it emerged that Surrey county council had been chosen to take part in a new government pilot scheme under which the local authority would retain 100% of business rates raised in the county.

But both Javid and the council strongly denied there was any sweetheart deal. A spokesman for Surrey county council said they could not comment on a meeting of the Conservative group, but said there had been no shift from a statement issued when the controversy first emerged.

Hodge said at the time: “Surrey’s decision not to proceed with a 15% council tax increase was ours alone and there has been no deal between Surrey county council and the government.

“However, I am confident that the government now understands the real pressures in adult social care and the need for a lasting solution.”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/mar/07/surrey-council-leader-had-gentlemans-agreement-with-ministers

Well, he would say that wouldn’t he!

Businessman calls for budget to boost businesses that just happen to be those of his fellow LEP board members.

Not the NHS, not social care, not tourism, not agriculture – businesses such as his own (housing developer – CEO of Midas Group).

Move on, move on, nothing to see here!

“<em>A budget to boost business is at the top of the wish list for the South West. Economic leaders are calling for policies that support innovation and investment – and that means business rate reform and investment in the region’s infrastructure.

Steve Hindley, CBE DL Chairman of the Heart of the South West Local Enterprise Partnership, said: “The South West peninsula crucially needs step change in its connectivity to unlock its potential for economic prosperity.

“We already have clusters of thriving businesses, top class universities, colleges, schools and a Science Park that compete in a global arena; and with improved access to markets, many other businesses can achieve sustainable growth and create new employment opportunities to bring our GVA up to the national average and beyond. … “

http://www.devonlive.com/better-trains-and-business-rate-reform-come-top-of-our-budget-wish-list/story-30186325-detail/story.html

Swire worried about effect of sugar tax – on soft drink manufacturers!

NHS crisis? What crisis? We must worry about how soft drinks manufacturers will suffer with a sugar tax.

Why are people voting for this man?

Written Answers – HM Treasury: Sugar: Taxation (6 Mar 2017)
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2017-02-28.65915.h&s=speaker%3A11265#g65915.q0

Hugo Swire: To ask Mr Chancellor of the Exchequer, if he will consider mitigating the effects of the soft drinks industry levy on those manufacturers currently paying additional tax to use organic rather than conventional sugar.

Written Answers – Department of Health: Sugar: Obesity (6 Mar 2017)
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2017-02-28.65916.h&s=speaker%3A11265#g65916.q0

Hugo Swire: To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what assessment he has made of the effects of high-cost and low-volume sugary drinks on levels of obesity.

Conflict of interest – it starts at the top

“The Bank of England’s new deputy governor has admitted breaching the Bank’s guidelines after she failed to declare that her brother worked for Barclays.

In a letter to the Treasury select committee, Charlotte Hogg apologised for not formally disclosing that her brother was the bank’s director of group strategy, which could conflict with her work on the Prudential Regulation Committee (PRC).

The apology comes after Hogg, who has been touted as a possible successor to Mark Carney, the Bank’s governor, told the committee at a hearing last week that she always declared areas of conflicts of interests and was compliant with all of the Bank’s codes of conduct because she helped write them.

The PRC has direct responsibility for regulating banks, including Barclays.

In the letter, Hogg wrote: “As Barclays Bank plc is regulated by the PRA, under the Bank’s internal code of conduct and personal relationships policy, I should have formally declared my brother’s role when I first joined the Bank.

“I did not do so and I take full responsibility for this oversight. I have now added a full record of my brother’s role in the Bank’s HR systems.

“Regrettably, my oversight means that my oral evidence to the committee in this respect was not accurate. I write now to correct that evidence at the earliest opportunity and to place on record my sincere apologies to the committee.”

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/mar/07/bank-of-england-deputy-governor-fails-to-declare-conflict-of-interest