Yet another consultation on our “broken” housing market (yet another opportunity for developers to shaft us?)

Here is the White Paper”:

Click to access Fixing_our_broken_housing_market_-_housing_white_paper.pdf

Here is the consultation document on it:
https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/fixing-our-broken-housing-market-consultation

This consultation closes at

11:45pm on

2 May 2017

[just before local elections …]

You can respond online here:
https://www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/QLLWWSS

Another opportunity for the public not to be listened to, another chance for the government and developers to create loopholes.

A first thought: if “small builders” are going to be encouraged to build the cheapest houses, how do they get the economies of scale the big builders get? Well, we could charge no VAT at all on smaller, affordable house building on small sites of say 10 homes or less and LOTS OF VAT on luxury houses on big sites.

What’s that? It’s the sound of the big developer choking on their pate de foie gras whilst trying to phone the Tory party chairman? Surprise, surprise!

Land unavailability

A comment under the article on the new housebuilding “initiatives” in The Guardian today:

“The impact of land unaffordability on the real economy and disposable income/savings of the majority of the residents of England …

A. 69% of the land in England is owned by 0.6% of the population.

B. 33% of the land in England is still owned by the aristocracy.

C. Most of the land suitable for housing owned by government, Local Authorities and other state bodies was used up in the post WW11 housing drive.

D. UK cities rest upon 8% of the UK land mass and house 54% of the population.

E. And what of the fabled Green Belt?

UNREAL ECONOMY Most of the land suitable for housing is in the ownership of the landbankers whether they be aristocrats, private sector groups and the like.

REAL IMPACT The current land situation guarantees that most under 35’s will only own 24 square feet of land by the end of their lives and face a life where their income will be used to mostly pay rent.”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/feb/07/councils-to-be-told-to-build-thousands-more-new-homes

“BBC commits £8m for 150 local democracy reporters to cover council meetings”

Well, the need for a BBC-paid journalist to work for a newspaper that already has “a previous track record of public service journalism” should knock out the odd newspaper group in our area! Perhaps there should be a further qualification that the newspapers should receive less than 50% of that area’s council advertising budget too! And a shame that they won’t be allowed to attend Local Enterprise Partnership board meetings which are held in secret.

“The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) is to fund 150 news reporters to cover council and public meetings across the UK to enable better scrutiny of council proceedings and decisions.

The journalists will work for “qualifying” regional publishers rather than the BBC, with the remit of covering full council and committee meetings, and will share the information gained with the BBC. To qualify, local news organisations will need to demonstrate that they have a “previous track record” of public service journalism, as well as the ability to employ staff.

James Harding, director of BBC News and Current Affairs, said: “As more power is devolved across the UK, it’s more important than ever that we cover, understand and hold to account local politicians and public services,” he said.

The initiative forms part of the BBC’s new charter which commences this year and is aimed at filling the growing gaps in local news reporting as local newspapers have suffered from declining revenues.

So far, the BBC has allocated 20 reporters in Scotland, three in Northern Ireland, 11 in Wales and 104 in England, with plans to place the full 150 journalists by 2018.”

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=29922%3Abbc-commits-p8m-for-150-local-democracy-reporters-to-cover-council-meetings&catid=59&Itemid=27

Housing market ” broken” says government – duh!

Owl says: funny how it took the government SO long to see the “housing market” is, and always has been, broken under their tenure.

Still, lots of developers have got VERY rich on the back of their mistakes … developers who give LOTS and LOTS of money to the Conservative Party and who basically were given the National Planning Policy Framework to write in their own image.

However, now that there is a real possibility of losing millions of votes from people in dire housing need – the “just about managing” that they must capture and keep if they want to stay in power not just feckless Labour voters – more tinkering at the edges is being offered, rather than real solutions.

What is needed is what happened after WW2: a massive government housebuilding programme – NOT developer-led.

Still, never too late …! Although Brexit now pushing up materials costs due to the devaluation of the pound coupled with a shortage of skilled labour makes this the worst of times for the government to dig itself out of a very big hole.

“England’s housing market is “broken”, ministers have admitted, as they unveil plans to build more affordable homes.

The new housing strategy for England includes forcing councils to plan for their local housing needs and giving them powers to pressure developers to start building on land they own.

Communities Secretary Sajid Javid said people want a decent home not a “false choice” between renting and owning.

Labour accused the government of “seven years of failure” on housing.
The government says at least 250,000 new homes are needed each year to keep pace with demand and local councils and developers need to “get real” to the scale of the challenge.

Mr Javid will set out the details of the housing White Paper in a statement to MPs.

Measures are expected to include:

Forcing councils to produce an up-to-date plan for housing demand
Expecting developers to avoid “low density” housing where land availability is short
Reducing the time allowed between planning permission and the start of building from three to two years
Using a £3bn fund to help smaller building firms challenge major developers, including support for off-site construction, where parts of buildings are assembled in a factory
A “lifetime ISA” to help first-time buyers save for a deposit
Maintaining protection for the green belt, which can only be built on “in exceptional circumstances”
So-called starter homes, championed by ex-PM David Cameron, will be aimed at “households that need them most” with combined incomes of less than £80,000 or £90,000 in London.

The government said there would be a change in focus from starter homes – which will be offered to first-time buyers at a discount – to “a wider range of affordable housing”.

Mr Javid will say: “Walk down your local high street today and there’s one sight you’re almost certain to see. Young people, faces pressed against the estate agent’s window, trying and failing to find a home they can afford.
“With prices continuing to skyrocket, if we don’t act now, a whole generation could be left behind. We need to do better, and that means tackling the failures at every point in the system.

“The housing market in this country is broken and the solution means building many more houses in the places that people want to live.”

Asked if ministers were abandoning their goal of increasing home ownership – an ambition of most post-war Conservative governments – Mr Javid told BBC Radio 4’s Today that the approach “shouldn’t all be about ownership”.
“It is a false choice. The reality is we need more homes, whether to rent or buy.”

With house prices now eight times average earnings and the number of affordable homes being built at a 24-year low, he said the cost of housing was the “greatest barrier to social progress in Britain today”.

Many councils, he added, had “fudged the numbers” when it came to assessing local housing needs and this had to change.

Ministers have admitted the government is behind schedule in its efforts to build one million new homes in England by 2020.

The Campaign to Protect Rural England welcomed what it said was a focus on addressing current failings rather than “meddling” with the planning system.
“We are pleased that ministers have recognised that weakening the Green Belt is unnecessary,” said chief executive Shaun Spiers. “But with 360,000 houses already proposed for Green Belt land the government needs to do much more to uphold national policy and stop councils releasing it for development.”

Labour’s shadow housing minister John Healey said: “The measures announced so far in Theresa May’s long-promised housing white paper are feeble beyond belief.

“After seven years of failure and 1,000 housing announcements, the housing crisis is getting worse not better.”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-38884601

Local authority staffing: expand or shrink?

Artificial intelligence and automation in the public sector could render almost 250,000 administrative roles obsolete, the Reform think-tank has concluded.

In a report published today, Reform examined how public sector productivity could be improved, while achieving better outcomes and saving money. …

… Current staffing arrangements are “bottom-heavy”, the report found. In primary care, there are 10 receptionists for every 14 clinicians, and almost one per GP. In government, 37% of civil servants fill roles defined as administrative. …

… Away from the technology sphere, improved management practices would also help to boost productivity. As such, leaders should be trained to learn from mistakes rather than focusing on attributing blame, the report advised. Moreover, to get the best out of their employees, managers should be allowed to motivate them as they see fit, “unencumbered by rigid pay and performance management structures and role definitions.” …

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2017/02/march-technology-could-make-250000-public-sector-jobs-obsolete

“EDF ‘too poor to clean up its own mess’ “

And still we put our millions into preparing the site and infrastructure. Meanwhile, the NHS dies.

Will we be the “public” that bails out EDF and not the NHS?

The French state group building Britain’s new nuclear plant does not have enough cash to dismantle its domestic reactors, according to an official study. A French parliamentary committee said that EDF would need a public bailout to meet the cost of closing ageing power stations.

The warning was issued after unions expressed fury about an announcement that EDF plans to cut 3,900 jobs in France over the next three years.

Jean-Marc Sylvestre, an economics commentator, said that the group was on the “edge of a precipice” and faced a choice between privatisation and bankruptcy. He described EDF’s situation as a “catastrophe foretold”.
Theresa May has picked the French company to take a two-thirds share of the £18 billion plan to build two reactors at Hinkley Point, Somerset. China Nuclear General is shouldering the rest of the investment.

EDF’s critics say that the company, which has debts of more than €37 billion, lacks the financial resources to meet its commitments in France, let alone embark upon the Hinkley Point scheme. Their concerns were fuelled with the publication of a report by the Committee for Sustainable Development, which accused EDF of failing to plan for the dismantling of its plants. EDF has set aside has €36 billion to pay to clean up reactors at the end of their working lives.”

Source: Times Newspapers (paywall)

Exmouth: Will Dinan Way planning application be called in?

“The saga of the proposed completion of Dinan Way has taken another twist, after Whitehall chiefs stepped in to stop it being approved.

It had seemed the long wait for the new road was over, after Devon County Council’s development management committee voted to approve the scheme, for an 830m stretch of road linking Hulham Road and the A376, last week.
But the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) has now issued a holding notice, while it considers if the Secretary of State should intervene to make the final decision.

This is understood to be due to a protest by the National Trust, which has opposed the scheme due to concerns about the effect on Grade One listed A la Ronde, in nearby Summer Lane.

A DCLG spokesman said: “We have received some representation, and the decision we have made is to put in a holding direction, which means we now have the time to consider whether to call it in or not. If it was called in it would be for the Secretary of State to decide.”

Development management committee member Councillor Eileen Wragg said she understood the National Trust had made the application.

The National Trust had not responded to a request for a comment at the time of going to press.

Exmouth councillors had told last week’s meeting the new road was long overdue.

Councillor Bernard Hughes, whose Halsdon and Woodbury ward includes the site of the new road, told the committee: “Much traffic [currently] passes Exmouth Community College, and a hospital and a very busy health centre. I have no doubt that, given the chance, an estimated 40 per cent of traffic would use this [proposed] road.”

Cllr Wragg said: “I have no hesitation in supporting this. “It would not redirect traffic from the A376, but it would reduce pressure on other roads running through residential areas.”

http://www.exmouthjournal.co.uk/news/plan_for_exmouth_s_dinan_way_hits_further_delay_1_4875160

Council takes out injunction against Persimmon for highways work not completed before house sales started

“In a statement made after the injunction was served but before agreement was reached, David Hammond, Housing and Planning Manager at Wychavon, said: “The highways issues relate to our concerns that construction traffic could meet other road traffic, cyclists and pedestrians on a road that is currently too narrow, unsuitable and unsafe for construction vehicles.

“By beginning development on site and selling homes, Persimmon is in breach of a planning condition that was imposed by the Secretary of State on 2 July 2014, a condition that clearly states that in the interests of public safety, the necessary highways work should have been completed before any development took place.”

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=29915%3Acouncil-and-developer-reach-deal-after-injunction-served-over-highways-issues&catid=56&Itemid=24

Help to buy or help to die?

Owl thinks the “smaller homes” to encourage older people to downsize will be luxury retirement properties a la PegasusLife, which will leave luxury top-end homes available for luxury top end home buyers. “Sheltered” housing association homes or council homes (i.e. affordable sheltered housing) – in your dreams!

Just another way for developers to milk cash cows.

“Theresa May’s government will use its flagship housing strategy to make it easier for older people to move into smaller homes, in a move that could free up larger properties for families.

A policy to incentivise more quality, newly built sheltered accommodation will be included in a white paper, which also aims to break the dominance of a limited number of large housebuilders.

Councils, housing associations and smaller developers will be encouraged to build more as the government sets out how it plans to meet a target of 1m new homes by 2020. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/feb/05/government-to-help-older-people-downsize-to-free-up-family-homes?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Developers “profit sharing” with NHBC warranty firm

“The organisation that provides warranties for most of the new homes in Britain is paying millions of pounds to the leading housebuilders every year, raising questions about its independence and credibility amid a wave of complaints about the quality of new-build properties.

NHBC, the standard-setting body and main home construction warranty provider for new builds in the UK, is paying around £10m to £15m every year to housebuilders through what is effectively a profit-share agreement. The largest firms can receive as much as £2m from the scheme, because it rewards the developers who registered the most homes with NHBC.

Campaigners said the revelation shows that NHBC is on the side of developers rather than consumers and that the lack of protection for buyers of new homes is a “scandal”.

A senior industry source said the annual payment to the housebuilders was a way to keep them “sweet” and ensure they remained NHBC customers. The source also said that the system is open to abuse, and there were at least two occasions since 2010 when a major housebuilder asked for an extra or increased payment which was approved by NHBC.

The questions about the credibility of NHBC, which claims to have an 80% share of the warranties market, will also be a headache for the government, which is poised to launch its housing white paper this week.

PM to reaffirm green belt pledge despite plans to ramp up housebuilding
There have been an increasing number of complaints about problems with new homes and the lack of protection and compensation for consumers from NHBC’s warranties. Last month it was revealed that Bovis had paid the purchasers of new homes to move in early only for the buyers to find the property unfinished.

The NHBC warranty is a form of insurance that is supposed to compensate home buyers or fix any faults in the new property if there are problems within the first 10 years.

Paula Higgins, co-founder and chief executive of the campaign group HomeOwners Alliance, said: “As we have more houses being built and the government encouraging people to buy new homes, we are seeing more and more issues with quality.

“The government is more concerned with numbers than homes for the future and there is a real danger that we are building the wrong sort of home.”

Higgins said NHBC was “too much of a monopoly” in the warranties market and described its relationship with housebuilders as “cosy”.

“I think NHBC is acting on behalf of the developers and its members. I don’t think they are acting on behalf of consumers,” said Higgins. “The quality of new homes – it is a scandal.”

The potential conflict of interest between NHBC paying compensation to consumers and returning cash to housebuilders will lead to more calls for the government to introduce an independent ombudsman to oversee complaints about new homes or for the Competition and Markets Authority to investigate NHBC’s dominance of the market.

Oliver Colvile, the Conservative MP who chair an all-party parliamentary group on new-build properties, said he had great concern about the independence of NHBC. He called for an ombudsman to be introduced and for homebuyers to be allowed to inspect their new home before they purchase it.

“I think what needs to happen is that the government needs to look at this seriously. This is a consumer rights issue,” he said. “Lets put the consumer on top of the list. I want to see action on this issue.”

NHBC has faced questions about its independence before because it is paid a membership fee by housebuilders, meaning they effectively fund it. However, this is the first time it has been revealed that NHBC pays millions back to developers.

The payment is referred to as a “premium refund” in the financial accounts of NHBC. However, it is only mentioned in the notes to the accounts and the amount paid out is not disclosed.

A letter seen by the Guardian from NHBC to a housebuilder shows the payment is based on a complex calculation that takes into account the number of homes registered by the developer 15 years ago, the cost of claims paid out on these homes and the investment return earned by the NHBC. The 15-year period allows time for the property to be built, sold and the warranty to expire. However, on top of this formula, each year the NHBC also determines the size of the total pot of cash that is available to be shared out with the housebuilders.

NHBC defended the payments but refused to confirm how much it had paid out to housebuilders or comment on the extra payments to the two housebuilders.

The NHBC said: “NHBC provides a market-leading warranty, which currently protects 1.6 million UK consumers.

“Last year we paid £90m in respect of claims in addition to providing assistance to homeowners through our resolution service, which mediates between homeowners and their builder and last year found in favour of homeowners in 70% of cases.

“As is standard practice, we do not discuss our commercial transactions or our underwriting terms.

“It is common practice in the insurance industry to recognise good claims history in a number of ways such as no-claim bonuses, and this is what our premium refund system, established in the 1990s and disclosed in our accounts, is designed to achieve.

“The system is consistently applied and is based on clear rules and processes. As this refund recognises long-term good claims history, the rules state that builders do not need to be current NHBC customers to receive it.

“The sum paid in refunds is a very small proportion of NHBC’s annual turnover.”

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/feb/05/new-homes-warranty-firm-pays-millions-to-leading-homebuilders

Some building costs up 35% – another (expensive) nail in the relocation project?

And to think, some careful maintenance of Knowle and some judicious spending when the sun was shining and councillors could have been enjoying up-to-date facilities for years!

“Bricks and timber have become the latest products to be hit by sterling’s slide after Britain’s decision to leave the European Union.

An investigation by The Mail on Sunday into the effects of the referendum has identified sweeping price rises of up to 35 per cent on some building materials.

The revelation comes in the week the Government unveils its Housing White Paper aimed at easing the country’s housing shortage with a massive boost to home-building.

The building industry is also under pressure from an acute skills shortage – which trade bodies warn may be made much worse if tradesmen from countries such as Poland find it more difficult to work in the UK.

The Mail on Sunday’s analysis of figures released last week shows prices on a wide variety of materials, including loft insulation, plasterboard and chipboard, rising at their fastest rate for 25 years.

The increases will hit not only those looking to buy new-build homes, but anyone thinking of extending their house or planning a loft conversion. …”

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-4191564/Building-costs-rocket-brick-timber-prices-soaring.html

Cranbrook’s district heating system under fire – no switching allowed and developers get a cut for 80 year contract

“Energy customers who find themselves paying over the odds for their heating can simply switch to a cheaper deal. But there’s a hidden, but rapidly growing, number who estimate they’re paying up to three times more than the expected price… but don’t have the right to switch. In most cases, they are stuck with the same supplier for 25 years or more.

They are among the 220,000 households signed up to District Heating networks which power entire estates by sending hot water and steam via insulated pipes from a central generator, instead of having a boiler in each home. [This is the system used at Cranbrook].

The system, often fuelled by natural gas or biomass, is supposed to point the way to a greener future and has the enthusiastic backing of government.

However, the suppliers are unregulated and customers of only five of them have the right to turn to the energy ombudsman if things go wrong. [The system at Cranbrook is run by E.on where it appears from this article customers do not have the right to go to the Ombudsman].

On the face of it, the schemes are good news. Unlike condensing power plants, that only use around a third of the electricity generated, district networks use 90%. Waste energy can be recycled, households no longer have to maintain their own boilers, and heating bills are supposed to be cheaper.

Last year the government announced it was investing £320m in expanding the system across the UK and predicts that it will supply 8 million households by 2030. In London, where new developments are required to be zero carbon, it is being used in most large estates.

In reality, though, residents complain of enormous, opaque energy bills, frequent outages and misinformation.

A Which? investigation in 2015 found that some schemes are poorly designed and that customers are being misled about costs. It also concluded that many people are unaware of the District Heating scheme when they purchase a flat.

… Any company – including the property developer – can set itself up as a District Heating supplier without a licence, and a full list of those in operation is not yet publicly available.

They are selected by the developer who will receive a commission, or a substantial contribution towards the network infrastructure, in return for a contract to supply the development for at least 25 years. E.on has an 80-year contract to supply Cranbrook, a new town in East Devon.

Once they’ve bought into a development, residents are locked into a monopoly. They are not allowed to fit solar panels or heat source pumps and, whether or not they use their heating, remain liable for often large standing charges which include maintenance and repair of the infrastructure.

Matthew Pennycook, Labour MP for Greenwich and Woolwich, which includes eight District Heating networks, says residents tell him bills have tripled under the scheme, and there’s no transparency in consumption and billing. …

… Last year Pennycook [an MP] surveyed residents at New Capital Quay, a development in his constituency that uses e.on District Heating scheme. The responses, he says, provide “prima facie evidence of systematic problems” including inexplicably high bills and poor customer service.

Last April, the Advertising Standards Authority upheld a complaint by New Capital Quay residents that e.on’s advertised promise that its charges were comparable to those of a traditional gas boiler, was misleading. The sentence has since been removed from its website.

“E.on offers customers a market-leading energy source with long-term protections and guarantees, as well as affordable bills and a lower environmental impact,” the company claims.

There are fears that these issues will make it difficult to sell on flats. …

… Kabir Dhawan bought a one-bed flat in New Capital Quay in 2014. “I was told it was supplied by an energy-efficient scheme and was given a written promise that the costs would be no higher than for a conventional gas supply,” he says. “Instead, we are paying around £900 a year, including standing charges – the fixed cost of providing the home – of £1 a day.”

But 15 months ago the automated reading facility, which provides daily updates, stopped working.

“Some of my neighbours have the same problem, but although the standing charge is supposed to cover repairs to meters, it hasn’t been fixed,” he says.

“Instead, they’ve offered me £15 for the ‘inconvenience’.” Dhawan claims. “Because I can’t monitor my usage, I’m expecting a catch-up bill of around £500.”

Using e.on’s own estimates of consumption for a one-bed flat, he reckons that he is paying twice what he should for heat and hot water. Moreover, he says, the hot water supply is cut off for lengthy periods around once a month, most recently on New Year’s Day and that e.on often tries to duck the £30 payout due under its terms and conditions for outages of 24 hours or more.

A neighbour secured the compensation, due to all the residents after one such breakdown, but only after initiating legal proceedings.

E.on declined to comment on individual customer cases and stated it did not accept the basis of many of the allegations.

Dhawan fears that he will struggle to sell or let his flat because of the high costs and the service is a monopoly.”

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2017/feb/05/district-heating-fuel-bill-regulation

If you don’t like these policies, we have others …

“A major shift in Tory housing policy in favour of people who rent will be announced by ministers this week as Theresa May’s government admits that home ownership is now out of reach for millions of families.

In a departure from her predecessor David Cameron, who focused on advancing Margaret Thatcher’s ambition for a “home-owning democracy”, a white paper will aim to deliver more affordable and secure rental deals, and threaten tougher action against rogue landlords, for the millions of families unable to buy because of sky-high property prices. Ministers will say they want to change planning and other rules to ensure developers provide a proportion of new homes for “affordable rent” instead of just insisting that they provide a quota of “affordable homes for sale”.

They will also announce incentives to encourage landlords to offer “family-friendly” guaranteed three-year tenancies, new action to ban unscrupulous landlords who offer sub-standard properties, and a further consultation on banning many of the fees that are charged by letting agents.

A senior Whitehall source said: “We want to help renters get more choice, a better deal and more secure tenancies.” They added that the government did not want to scare people off from renting out homes, but offer incentives to encourage best practice and isolate the worst landlords. By emphasising the rights of renters, as well as trying to boost house building, the white paper will mark a turning point for a party that since the 1980s, and the first council house sales, has promoted home ownership as a badge of success, while neglecting the interests of renters. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/feb/04/may-abandons-home-owning-democracy-thatcher-tories

A council “Communications Officer” (press officer) tells the truth about his soul-destroying job

“I can’t face watching I, Daniel Blake because every day I feel complicit in a system that denigrates vulnerable people.

I knew leaving the voluntary sector to go and work for a local authority would require a culture shift, but I did not fully comprehend how difficult it would be to put a positive spin on cuts to local services after years spent promoting social justice campaigns.

I am part of a team which creates and distributes communications to the general public, through newsletters, the council website, on social media and through the local media. Working in communications often means putting aside your personal opinions and values for the good of the organisation paying your salary, and I have a lot of sympathy with local authorities now I’ve seen it from the inside.

I field calls for stretched council services – and soon my job may be cut too.

With brutal funding cuts from central government and the growing pressure on services, many councils are trying to make the best of a bad situation and make budgets stretch, regardless of politics.

But when Ken Loach’s ‘I, Daniel Blake’ was released last year, all my friends went to watch it in the cinema. I could not face going with them, knowing I was complicit in the same system the film portrayed as destroying people’s lives.

I can see the red tape responsible for the denigration of vulnerable people around me every day, and to be responsible for dressing up the effects of needless bureaucracy in a pretty package for our local papers is soul-destroying. Our press releases go through rigorous rounds of sign off, through all sorts of departments, senior council officers and councillors, all of whom want to remove any material that could incur criticism, which results in bland, council-speak copy.

People probably wouldn’t expect a press officer to care about local reporters, especially as they are usually asking us for responses to critical stories about the council, but I have real sympathy with them. Most of them are inexperienced and clearly stretched for time and resources: their copy is riddled with factual errors that could easily have been double checked, resulting in fractious phone calls between our side and theirs.

The vulnerable people I became a councillor to help have no idea I’m here. The reality is most residents don’t have the time or inclination to attend committee meetings or read all the reports and documents produced by the council. They should know how funding cuts are going to affect their local services and communities. It’s all there in black and white if you know where to find it. It’s an easier time for us if contentious issues pass through committees easily, as there are fewer difficult questions from reporters for the week’s papers.

Social media has become another accountability function for councils, which creates a lot more noise for us to deal with. Most councils will have active citizen campaigners ready to jump on any communication the council puts out to rip it to shreds. These days, it’s actually these people, rather than journalists, who spot the things the council would prefer went unquestioned. It can be disheartening, particularly when you’ve worked hard to capture the nuance of a complicated situation, but when you agree with the critics over the council it’s hard to take it too personally.”

https://www.theguardian.com/public-leaders-network/2017/feb/04/media-press-officer-council-cuts-local-papers-daniel-blake

More schools in East Devon to cut staff

“More schools in East Devon have revealed they are looking at reducing staff numbers because of cuts to education funding.

This week Clyst Vale Community College’s governing body told staff all their jobs were under consultation. The school in Broadclyst is facing a deficit and its student numbers are down by 300 compared with five years ago.

Two other East Devon secondary schools will also shortly be invoking their redundancy processes, but it has not been revealed which schools they are.

And now the headteacher of Exeter Road Community Primary School in Exmouth has admitted unless it makes cuts to its staffing costs it will unable to balance its budget.

Paul Gosling said: “Exeter Road has a higher percentage of children from disadvantaged backgrounds than the national average, but this school performs well because of the contribution that support staff make to the welfare and learning of vulnerable children.

“We are now preparing for the 2017/18 financial year and, based on the information that we currently have, unless we continue to make some cuts in our staffing costs we will not be able to balance our budget.

“Our good performance is put at risk by the savings we might be forced to make, as the number of support staff we employ is the only place left that we can cut.”

Schools in Devon will soon be seeing the impact of an estimated £3bn shortfall in the government’s education budget by 2020.

They are the first real terms cuts to education spending since the 1990s, with 98 per cent of schools set to lose funding at a time when costs are rising and pupil numbers on average are growing.

Devon is likely to lose an average of £401 per pupil – a total of over £35m for the region as a whole. It is feared class sizes in primary schools could rise and some GCSE and A Level subjects could be cut from the curriculum.

Russell Hobby, general secretary of school leaders’ union National Association of Head Teachers (NAHT), said: “School budgets are being pushed beyond breaking point. The government’s £3b real terms cut to education funding must be reversed or we will see education and care suffer.

“Already heads are being forced to cut staff, cut the curriculum and cut specialist support. A new funding formula is the right thing to do, but it cannot be truly fair unless there is enough money to go round in the first place.”

The NAHT is holding a series of national events to raise awareness among school leaders, governors and parents.

It will be meeting in Tiverton next Tuesday, February 7, to spread the word in the hope that local pressure will force the government to explain its rationale for cutting the education budget at a time when the school population is rising and costs are going up.”

http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/more-schools-to-cut-staff-in-east-devon/story-30111504-detail/story.html

Single unitary councils would save most money say researchers

This post is from November 2016 but is reprinted here due to its topicality. Given LEP power-grabbing and “Greater Exeter” and “Golden Triangle” options, our district council’s plan to move to Honiton looks questionable to say the least.

Should any of the above options pan out, even the current bases at Sidmouth and Exmouth (plus changing Manstone depot to part-office) seems grandiose!

“Creating 27 unitary councils across the whole of England could save as much as £2.9bn, according to an independent analysis of local government reorganisation options undertaken for the County Councils Network.

The report by consultants EY examined six different single and two-tier governance scenarios for county and district authorities, using existing county boundaries. Based on the analysis of national data, EY found that creation of unitaries along county boundaries could save between £2.37bn and £2.86bn over five years, and average up to £106m per county. The single unitary option has the shortest payback period, generating savings within two years and two months, according to the review.

Among the other options examined was a move to create two unitary authorities per county, which would establish 54 councils.

Under this proposal, savings worth £1.17bn and £1.7bn would be made in a five-year timeframe, only around 59% of the saving of the proposal to create unitaries along current boundaries.

A third approach considered abolishing county and district authorities and creating three unitaries per county. However, the creation of 81 new councils countrywide could result in a net cost to the taxpayer of £33m over five years, although the range could also include a saving of £526m, dependent on how senior management and councillors are structured across the authorities. Whatever transpires, our council serms hell-bent on the most expensive option:

The review also considered reforming the current two-tier system through merging districts to reduce the average number in a county area from 7.4 to 3. Such a scenario could make savings of between £531m and £839m over five years.

A further scenario to create three unitary authorities and a combined authority, which would then deliver major services like adult social care, children’s social care and transport, was likely to cost between £36m and £366m over five years. Such an approach has been considered in areas such as Oxfordshire and Buckinghamshire, but EY highlighted the risks of this ‘untried and untested’ model of reorganisation. …”

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2016/11/local-government-reorganisation-switch-unitaries-could-save-ps29bn#disqus_thread

How long is a piece of NHS Property Services string?

New owners of Sidmouth Victoria Hospital under fire for ‘incomprehensible’ answer to rent question.

NHS Property Services (NHSPS) took over 12 East Devon community hospitals on December 1, 2016 – prompting fears from some trustees and representatives over the future of the facilities under a commercially-operated company.

Speaking at a recent Devon County Council (DCC) health and wellbeing scrutiny meeting, Councillor Claire Wright called for NHSPS bosses to be held to account and voiced her frustration at repeated failures to provide the authority with more information.

Cllr Wright asked the company to outline how much each community hospital is being charged in rent, but NHSPS says it is unable to disclose the figures as they remain in commercial confidence while lease negotiations are being concluded.

Cllr Wright said: “I asked for the information in June and I asked again and they said they would get the information and they did not. The answer they have given is incomprehensible.

“A very strong message needs to go back that we have now been waiting seven months for an answer to a very straightforward question and we would appreciate it if they would come to the next meeting because they now own 12 community hospitals across East Devon.”

NHSPS is responsible for managing 3,500 NHS buildings and ploughs any profits back into the health services – selling on property it considers no longer necessary.

Cllr Wright argued it cannot ‘pick and choose’ and, if it is – as claimed – a part of the NHS family, should be held accountable.

Sidmouth fundraisers have vowed to safeguard the future of the town’s hospital, which has undergone a £5million refurbishment paid for entirely by community contributions.

Vice president of the Sidmouth Victoria Hospital Comforts Fund, Frances Newth, said it has received assurance from NHSPS that there should be no noteable changes under the new ownership. She added that trustees have emphasised the amount of community support received in the town and the importance of maintaining it.

Responding to a question from DCC about the amount of rental income compared to figures spent on maintenance, NHSPS revealed its budgeted rental income for 2016/17 is £408 million nationally.

The amount set out for routine, small-scale maintenance in this period is £98 million – which does not include overheads such as salaries of teams carrying out the work – and an additional £60 million is forecasted for larger maintenance projects.

A spokesman for NHSPS said: “The information sent to the council this month was provided further to attending two committee sessions in 2016, where members had the opportunity to question company representatives in person.

“We have provided supporting written information on two other occasions, as requested by the council.”

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/new_owners_of_sidmouth_victoria_hospital_under_fire_for_incomprehensible_answer_to_rent_question_1_4874530

Tell the truth and be fired …

“A veteran councillor in Theresa May’s constituency has been sacked after questioning plans for thousands of homes in the green belt.

Leo Walters, a former Conservative mayor of the Royal Borough of Windsor and Maidenhead, was removed as chairman of the council’s housing scrutiny panel after expressing concern that the public had not been fully informed about the threat to the green belt.

He said that he had been removed by Simon Dudley, the council’s leader, after “simply handing out facts”.

Mr Walters had sent an email to his fellow panel members informing them of a Freedom of Information response from the council revealing that 86 per cent of the land that it was proposing for development was in the green belt. …”

Source: The Times (paywall)

Is Trump using the Local Enterprise Partnership model?

This is spookily like the way our Local Enterprise Partnerships (and before that, the East Devon Business Forum) were created – with business people in the driving seat and councils as passengers without seatbelts!

“President Donald Trump met with a roomful of top CEOs at the White House – and says he tried to install other titans of industry on his executive council only to have them nixed as ‘corporate raiders.’

Trump met with a group that included Jamie Dimon of JP Morgan, BlackRock CEO Laurence Fink, retired GE CEO Jack Welch – whom he called ‘legendary’ – and other business bigs.

As if that weren’t enough financial firepower, Trump said that he tried to get other financial bigs onto the panel, which meets about once a month to advise him the economy, taxes, and regulations.

‘So many people have called – friends of mine in big business,’ Trump said, ‘and that wanted to be on the committee.’

Billionaire Stephen Schwartzman of Blackstone private equity firm, who serves on the council, acted as gatekeeper. “I said, ‘Steve, can we get so and so?’ Trump said, with the CEOs gathered around him.

‘Nope,’ Schwartzman replied. ‘What do you mean no, it’s big business, massive business,’ Trump pleaded, in his telling.

‘How about this one?’ Trump would ask.

‘He’s a corporate raider, these people don’t want to be sitting with corporate raiders,’ was Schwartzman’s reply.

‘He’s been very very selective,’ Trump said, adding: ‘We’ll be putting a couple more on this.’

Introducing the group, Trump hailed BlackRock investment company CEO Larry Fink for having boosted his personal bottom line through investments.

Trump displayed no reservations about asking some of the world’s most influential bankers about their preferences for peeling back bank regulations enacted after the financial crisis.

‘We have some of the bankers here. There’s nobody to tell me better about Dodd-Frank than Jamie, so you’re going to tell me about it, but we expect to be cutting a lot out of Dodd-Frank.

The White House billed the event as a strategy and policy forum.
The group’s official title is the President’s Strategic and Policy Forum. It has 16 members.

Absent from the event was Uber chief executive Travis Kalanick, who announced just hours before that he had quit, following pressure from consumers over Trump’s new immigration order.

Trump didn’t mention Kalanick during his public comments.

The Uber boss quit the council, even as the company is facing blowback for its decision to drop its congestion pricing during a taxi boycott meant to oppose the immigration order.

He made his decision known in an email to employees, where he argued against Trump’s new immigration ban.

‘Earlier today I spoke briefly with the president about the immigration executive order and its issues for our community,’ Kalanick wrote. ‘I also let him know that I would not be able to participate on his economic council. Joining the group was not meant to be an endorsement of the president or his agenda but unfortunately it has been misinterpreted to be exactly that,’ he added.

Trump hailed another attendee, his Commerce Secretary nominee, billionaire Wilbur Ross.

‘When I campaigned for office I promised the American people that I’d ask for our country’s best and brightest, and we have that. Wilbur is representing us,’ Trump said.

Trump said of close confidante and business magnate Carl Icahn, ‘Carl Icahn called up and he goes, ‘I heard you got Wilbur. Everybody calls him Wilbur. I’ve never heard him called – we just know him as Wilbur, right?”

Trump met the business honchos as he prepared to sign executive actions asking the Treasury and the Labor Departments to examine reforms to roll back regulations intended to make markets safer and protect consumers.
The actions would examine the ‘Volcker Rule,’ meant to curb speculation, AFP reported.

‘(We) believe that Dodd-Frank in many respects was a piece of massive government overreach,’ a senior administration official told the outlet. ‘It imposed hundreds of new regulations on financial institutions, it established an enormous amount of work and effort for financial firms.'”

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4188962/Trump-meets-CEOs-says-ll-slash-bank-regs.html

Trump takes a leaf out of EDDC’s book!

“Public-interest advocacy groups say the White House appears to be deliberately structuring Trump’s growing roster of business-focused advisory groups in order to avoid becoming subject to a federal transparency law that requires such meetings be formally announced in advance and open to the public.

“Whether it’s hastily drafted executive orders put together in the dead of night and riddled with errors and not consulting the pertinent government agencies or putting together other proposals that are shocking to many Americans, nothing that has been done so far has been inclusive, so it’s not a surprise his small working groups of CEOs would be just the same,” said Lisa Gilbert of Public Citizen.

A 1972 law aimed at limiting back-room influence by special interests, the Federal Advisory Committee Act, regulates the operation of federal government advisory council. Normally, the meetings of such groups are announced at least ten days in advance in the Federal Register and the sessions are open to the public. Advisory committees are also required to have an official charter, records available to the public and a federal official present during all deliberations. Presidential advisory panels are also typically set up through executive orders.

So far, there have been no official notices of any meetings and no executive orders laying out the duties of the “Strategic and Policy Forum” or any other groups Trump is convening.”

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/02/trump-transparency-law-advisory-boards-234583