And Councillor Moulding might be advised to watch his words too!

On the question of hospital Moulding says in this week’s Midweek Herald that EDDC’s health scrutiny committee should examine the CCG’s audited accounts.

The Scrutiny Committee isn’t even allowed to see EDDC’s own accounts and information for things like relocation, let alone ask for and scrutinise other people’s!

And aren’t this years EDDC accounts being held up by auditors who have not yet signed them off (due in September) as they are not happy that some £700,000 plus of Section 106 money seems to be a problem area?

Don’t do as we do, do as we say?

People in glass houses would be well advised not to throw stones

An EDDC district councillor recently talking about NHS bed cuts:

“The CCG uses inaccurate logic and biased consultation questions, therefore it’s not a real consultation – it’s an act of manipulation.”

An independent councillor? No – true blue Honiton Tory councillor Mike Allen,

Come on, Mike – you’ve been a Tory councillor at EDDC for years – surely you shouldn’t start complaining about these tactics now!

Biased questions – go to any regeneration area or anywhere Section 106 funds are being discussed: “You can have this or that”, “But we want the other!”, “Well, you can’t have it – it’s not on the form and we don’t want it.”

Real consultation? Name one EDDC consultation that didn’t have people up in arms.

Manipulation includes bending with the wind … remember the good old days when you were Chair of the Local Plan panel and refused to let the Ottery (independent) councillor speak about his ward on a crucial part of the plan? Biased? Maybe, maybe not – though Owl recalls you were rapped on the knuckles for that one.

Remember the good old East Devon Business Forum meetings that you attended?

Oh, and you can’t have inaccurate logic – it’s either logical or it isn’t.

Time to wake up and smell the … well, it certainly isn’t coffee.

Whatever happened to … Knowle relocation costs?

Given that Exmouth’s regeneration plan costs have more than doubled from £1.5m to £3.2m (see below) and part of that cost is said to be the development costs rising, whatever happened to Knowle relocation costs?

First it was going to be cost neutral …
Then it was going to cost an extra £4 million …
The latest estimate (some time ago) had the extra cost at £9.7 million

Since then:

… labour costs have increased (minimum wage rise)
… skilled labour is less available (migrants choosing not to come or being sucked into Hinkley C, our older skilled workers retiring and not being replaced by youngsters with the required training due to skills gap)
… imported raw materials costs have risen enormously due to the falling pound
… Community Infrastructure Levy to be paid

Of course, EDDC could build prefab offices to keep down costs, just as the government intends to do with housing …

Suddenly Knowle looks much more attractive in that bright autumn sun, with its lovely park and the view of the sea …

Oh, wait … it’s been flogged off for luxury retirement housing.

EDDC planning leaflet on what to do if build quality of new homes is bad

Cabinet meeting 9 November 2016, 17.30
Agenda Item 10

“Cabinet are asked to defer a decision on recommendation Minute 13 Recommendation 2 “that the Officers consider the resource and
financial implications for EDDC on the production of a leaflet giving advice to purchasers of new homes, on options available to them if issues arise regarding the quality of the build”; until further research has been undertaken by the Service Lead – Planning Strategy and Development Management.”

Click to access 091116combinedcabagenda-sm.pdf

QUESTION: Isn’t Building Control supposed to pick up poor build quality?
QUESTION: Should local authority searches identify poor quality buildings if the local authority knows this is the case?
QUESTION: Where are these poor quality homes and why are they not being identified?

Exmouth overspend and its worrying ramifications

See agenda item 16 – pages 81 – 91 of papers for next Cabinet meeting on 9 November:

Of particular note:

· The budget estimate rising from £1.5m to £3.12m

· As per 2.1 and 2.2 – a planning application for phases 2 and 3 is being submitted, as a ‘technical exercise’ to sustain the planning application (as the outline would be due to expire). [Is this allowed?]

· As quoted on page 84 ‘The planning authority will seek responses from the public to the planning application but the Council itself is not proposing to go beyond this with additional consultation for this technical exercise’.

· Consultation is then mentioned as coming after the technical exercise, in language used to imply consultation will be thorough (despite missing the important issue of consultation needing to happen before decisions are made!).

· Having told the tenants of the Harbour View (in a public meeting) that the Harbour View will be considered a separate application, and framing it to sound altruistic and caring of them, they now state that the Regeneration board has considered marketing the Harbour View site BEFORE the rest of the site in recognition of its value!”

… Loads more in there, makes awful reading.

Click to access 091116combinedcabagenda-sm.pdf

Exmouth/ EDDC: more of our money down the drain

“A report has highlighted that costs for Exmouth’s Queen’s Drive project have now more than doubled – from £1.5 million to £3.1 million.

The figures come as East Devon District Council (EDDC) continue looking for “fresh ideas” for the biggest chunk of the nine-acre development site – after sacking the previous developer, Moirai, over the summer.

They say they will be consulting with residents, businesses and tourists for this ‘third phase’ of the Queen’s Drive site in Exmouth.

http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/costs-double-for-exmouth-s-in-limbo-queens-drive-development/story-29858563-detail/story.html

LEP extends its tentacles to Cornwall and Dorset: Mayor for the South-West?


” … HotSW LEP is committed to delivering the benefits of our strategic work and funding bids to the companies and communities that fall directly within our area. These are our partners and are stakeholders in our successes and achievements. Sometimes business interests don’t neatly match administrative boundaries and for some time we have been working where appropriate with our neighbours on common campaigns or programmes.

Elsewhere in the country, the numerous LEPs in the Northern Powerhouse and the Midlands Engine also work together on their common agendas.

So we’ve been working with our LEP partners in Dorset and Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly to form a new thought-piece to market our area and its growth agenda where these cross our boundaries; which we’re calling Connecting the South West as a working title. It’s early days, but there’s real commitment in this group to build on the years of expert evidence building and strong Strategic Economic Plans that have risen from the government’s mandate to generate growth through LEPs and localism.

It’s often the case that when there is a mood and an appetite for change, that several organisations are on a similar journey, albeit in different ways. Earlier this month saw the South West Growth Summit – organised and led by Pennon and the Western Morning News – welcome businesses and local leaders to discussion panels and an inspirational speech by Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, Sajid Javid, who hailed the South West as an area with “almost unlimited potential”.

We expect more to happen on this theme in the coming months and years as the South West embarks on its renaissance.”

http://us4.campaign-archive1.com/?u=4e59660292bd6b4a5c7d7b8a7&id=e747106254&e=fa5cdb1f18

31October 2016 – Swire enjoys himself at Ambassadors Reception, London

Seems Swire just can’t tear himself away from foreign affairs. Still, no doubt it helps East Devon a lot … think of all those Kuwaiti tourists taking advantage of the fall of the pound … Sidmouth here they come!

FROM TWITTER
CMEC ‏@CMECnews Great evening @CMECnews Ambassadors Reception with speeches from @hugoswire @Tobias_Ellwood @foreignoffice & HE Khaled Al Duwaisan #kuwait

https://mobile.twitter.com/CMECnews

Residents want clarification of Knowle housing designation

An EDDC spokesperson says it will be up to the DMC to decide classification but then says there are legal aspects to be considered.

The DMC are laypersons- surely they are not qualified to take such decisions?

“District chiefs have yet to decide how the use of a proposed 115-home retirement community at Knowle should be classified.

The Knowle Residents’ Association this week called for clarity on the matter. Householders say that, if the development ends up classed as ‘C3’ – housing – developer PegasusLife will need to either include ‘affordable’ homes on-site, or pay towards them.

If it is care accommodation [C2], the group says the development will be even further from the 50 homes the site is allocated in East Devon District Council’s (EDDC) Local Plan.

Residents’ association chairman Kelvin Dent said the group is ‘amazed’ the authority has not decided what use class the development falls into. He added: “Our view is that the application is akin to housing – albeit with the occupants of the proposed apartments being able to purchase a package of care to suit their needs.

“Under planning law, this equates to a C3 use and PegasusLife will be obliged to provide social housing as part of their development or to make a substantial financial contribution towards the social housing that Sidmouth desperately needs and support for the local community.

“We look forward to receiving confirmation from EDDC that they agree and will be helping local young people to find a home.”

A spokeswoman for EDDC – which intends to relocate from the Knowle HQ to Exmouth and Honiton – said officers had been working on the basis that the development’s use would be C2.

She added: “However, officers have been considering whether the form and layout of the proposed development and the manner in which it is proposed to operate would constitute a C2 use or not.

“In considering this issue, officers have been, and continue to consider, the views expressed by residents and relevant case-law.”

The spokeswoman said the officers’ conclusions on PegasusLife’s application will likely be presented to EDDC’s development management committee (DMC) on December 6. The agenda will be published 10 days beforehand.

She added: “Ultimately, a decision on this issue is for the members of DMC to make.”

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/residents_call_for_clarity_over_future_knowle_use_1_4756297

Quiz Hernandez at EDDC scrutiny meeting this Thursday 3 November 6.00 pm

“Police and Crime Commissioner (pages 12 – 13)
The PCC, Alison Hernandez, will give a brief outline of her work since her election and respond to the questions submitted in advance (contained in the agenda papers) as well as answer questions put at the meeting.”

Click to access 031116-scrutiny-agenda-combined.pdf

Swire pokes his nose in … no doubt there will be selfies …

“Home Secretary Amber Rudd will come to Exeter to thank the emergency services for their hard work. The announcement follows an invite by East Devon MP Hugo Swire.

She said in the Commons: “We all saw over the weekend the dreadful scenes in Exeter and indeed I would be delighted to come with him and thank the police and the fire rescue teams that did such fantastic work dealing with such a difficult situation.”

http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/exeter-fire-day-five-live-blog-giant-demolition-machine-has-arrived-in-exeter/story-29857157-detail/story.html

1. Exeter is the constituency of Labour MP Ben Bradshaw and is nothing to do with Swire.

2. Theresa May presided over massive cuts to the police and fire services which her successor Rudd is now continuing.

Yet another example of Swire’s arrogance. Not to mention Rudd’s hypocrisy.

Will Alison Hernandez turn up? You bet!

BBC Inside Out – Exeter Fire and Hinkley safety concerns

When on iPlayer, worth watching tonight’s Inside Out (BBC)- a brief overview of the Royal Clarence Hotel fire and interviews about the safety of the current Hinkley nuclear reactors where there may well be serious cracks in the structure and graphite blocks weakening around the nuclear rods in a plant at the end of its useful life.

EDF says on the programme that cracks should be ok till “at least 2023” which is very reassuring! And that it wants to be allowed to work with 20% cracks and not the current 10%.

The debate on this will continue on Radio 4’s “Costing the Earth” at 3 pm tomorrow (Tuesday).

Make millions, pay peanuts … EDDC says that’s fine

“Town councillors have reiterated their opposition to Churchill Retirement Living’s plans to demolish Green Close, in Drakes Avenue, and build 36 sheltered housing apartments for the elderly.

They said the housing stock for older people cannot keep growing without also creating homes for nurses and carers to look after them – and argued the developer could cut into its 30 per cent operating profit margin to pay for it.

Planning committee members suggested Churchill should pay at least £360,000.

Councillor Ian Barlow, committee chairman, told the Herald: “Churchill’s profit margin is the one of the highest in the industry.

“They say they can’t pay more than £41,000 or it won’t be profitable – but those 36 homes are probably going to be worth £6-7million.

“Churchill is making a profit and taking it out of the town. They’re bringing in older people who will use the facilities, but they’re barely putting anything into the pot.”

The £41,000 referred to is a ‘section 106’ payment – cash that is meant to mitigate the impact of developments and fund improvements such as ‘affordable’ housing. The contribution depends on factors such as the size and number of dwellings being built.

Churchill is proposing to build 36 apartments in place of the 23-bed Green Close care home, which was run by Devon County Council until cutbacks brought about its closure in 2014.

The planning committee, which met last week, ruled: “Members noted that a contribution of £41,208 had been offered by the applicant towards affordable housing. Members expressed the view that this was an insult to the community of Sidmouth and urged the local planning authority not to accept the offer.”

Cllr Barlow compared the Green Close proposal with the Sanditon development, on the plot of the former Fortfield Hotel.

The developer there built 29 apartments and made a £1.5million ‘section 106’ payment – 36 times what Churchill is offering.

Cllr Barlow said the firm can avoid a larger payment because it is creating sheltered housing, adding: “We’re concerned that a lot of places are being provided for the elderly, but there’s nowhere being built for younger people.

“If there’s no provision at the same time for a nurse or a carer to live, who is going to look after them?”

Churchill’s planning director, Andrew Burgess, told the Herald: “We are disappointed by Sidmouth Town Council’s decision, since we have been consulting the community and working with the planning authorities for several months to develop plans for an attractive and sustainable new retirement community that will bring benefits to local people and the local economy.”

He said the proposed affordable housing contribution is based on a detailed viability assessment, industry best practice and factors such as the market value of the site.

Mr Burgess added: “We will continue to work with the council and the local community to ensure we can deliver the high-quality specialist retirement accommodation that is urgently needed by older people in Sidmouth.”

The application has been recommended for approval by EDDC’s planning officers, who noted the ‘comparatively modest’ financial contribution.

The authority’s development management committee will decide its fate on Tuesday (November 1).”

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/home/developer_s_offer_slammed_as_insult_to_sidmouth_1_4756271

“Tory councils warn of £600m black hole after demise of education bill”

“Conservative council leaders are warning they face a £600m black hole in budgets to improve struggling schools after the government last week pulled the plug on its education bill.

With council budgets already under severe pressure after years of austerity, some say they may need maintained schools to contribute from their own shrinking budgets, while others may be forced to cut support services they provide to local schools, leaving them vulnerable to decline.

The threat to school improvement services comes as Ofsted’s chief inspector, Sir Michael Wilshaw, described England’s schools as “mediocre but getting better”, giving the education system a rating of “6.5 out of 10”.

Local authorities – including Conservative-run county councils in Kent, Hampshire and Buckinghamshire – say they have been left in limbo by the government’s axing of educational services grants worth £600m ahead of passing the bill that would have curtailed the role of local authorities in maintaining community schools in England.

But the demise, announced to parliament by education secretary Justine Greening last Thursday, of the education for all bill, means councils will still be legally required to run school improvement services next year and meet other costs, such as maternity cover for teachers, but without funding from central government.

Martin Tett, the Conservative leader of Buckinghamshire county council, condemned the government’s failure to coordinate its funding and support for the many state schools that have not become academies.

“What we now have is a situation where the grant is being removed but the responsibilities will remain, particularly the statutory responsibility with regard to school improvement. And councils at the moment – particularly upper-tier councils, like county councils – are very financially stretched,” Tett said.

“This is a massive issue for us, because we have an important role in school improvement – not only supporting schools that require improvement or are in special measures, but actually stopping schools from reaching that stage in first place, by intervening early in a preventative approach.That costs money and, at the moment, that money is disappearing.”

The cuts will affect the bulk of the more than 20,000 state schools in England which are still maintained by their local authorities, rather than the fewer than 5,000 academies which are funded directly by central government.

Research by the County Councils Network – representing 37 unitary authorities and county councils – has found that more than two-thirds of academies choose to purchase school improvement services from their local authority, meaning that academies also rely on council support in many places. …”

http://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/oct/30/tory-councils-600m-black-hole-demise-education-bill-grant-england

“Theresa May’s claim on health funding not true, say MPs”

“Two Tories among signatories of letter pointing out that PM’s statement about £10bn extra cash for NHS are untrue.

Theresa May’s claims that the government is putting £10bn extra into the NHS are untrue and the underfunding of the health service is so severe that it may soon trigger rationing of treatment and hospital unit closures, a group of influential MPs have warned Philip Hammond.

Five MPs led by the Conservative Dr Sarah Wollaston, the chair of the Commons health select committee, have written to the chancellor demanding the government abandon its “incorrect” claims of putting £10bn into the NHS annual budget by the end of this parliament and admit the severity of its financial shortage.

“The continued use of the figure of £10bn for the additional health spending up to 2020-21 is not only incorrect but risks giving a false impression that the NHS is awash with cash,” Wollaston and four fellow committee members tell the chancellor in a letter.

“This figure is often combined with a claim that the government ‘has given the NHS what it asked for’. Again, this claim does not stand up to scrutiny as NHS England spending cannot be seen in isolation from other areas of health spending.”

The letter’s other signatures are Dr James Davies, a Conservative MP who is also a family doctor; Labour’s Ben Bradshaw, a former health minister, Labour MP Emma Reynolds; and Dr Philippa Whitford of the Scottish National party, who is an NHS breast cancer specialist.

Their letter’s detailed rejection of the government’s claims raises serious questions about the accuracy of May’s insistence, in a newspaper interview on 17 October and again at prime minister’s questions two days later, that her administration was giving NHS England boss Simon Stevens even more than he had sought in negotiations with ministers.

May told the Manchester Evening News: “Simon Stevens was asked to come forward with a five-year plan for the NHS. He said that it needed £8bn extra; the government has not just given him £8bn extra, we’ve given him £10bn extra. As I say, we have given the NHS more than the extra money they said they wanted for their five-year plan.”

However, the MPs say that May’s £10bn claim cannot be justified. “The £10bn figure can only be reached by adding an extra year to the spending review period, changing the date from which the real terms increase is calculated and disregarding the total health budget,” they concluded.

In the run-up to the general election, George Osborne, the then chancellor, promised to spend £8bn more a year by 2020, a figure that has risen since. But the MPs dispute that arithmetic, saying that the real amount of extra cash being given to the NHS in England between 2014-15 and 2020-21 is only £6bn and even that much smaller sum has only come from cutting spending on public health programmes and medical education and training by £3.5bn.

Worries about health service funding have emerged with increasing intensity in the run-up to the autumn statement on 23 November after it emerged that May told the head of the NHS in private that it would get no additional money this parliament.

Last year, finances were so tight that the NHS overspent its budget but public pressure to fund the health service generously remains strong. During the EU referendum campaign, the successful leave campaign promised to boost funding for the health service by diverting money that it said was being spent in Europe.

Warning of the political risk involved in underfunding the NHS, the five MPs add that “public expectations of the health service, and the continued rise in demand for its care produced by an increasing and ageing population, mean that measures which could be taken in some government departments are not acceptable in the NHS … including rationing of care and cuts in service provision.”

The MPs maintain that what they see as short-sighted cuts to social care threaten the viability of NHS services. They also raised the risks of the Department of Health “repeatedly raiding” the NHS’s capital budget in recent years and the decision to give the NHS only tiny budget increases in 2017-18 and in the two years afterwards.

“Our fear is that, given the ‘U-shaped’ trajectory of increases in funding for the NHS over the spending review period, these short-term pressures will become overwhelming. Despite the real-terms increases set out in the spending review, per capita funding for the NHS is projected to be flat in 2017-18 and actually to fall in 2018-19. That calls into question the ability of the NHS to maintain services in the latter part of the spending review period,” they say.

Andrew Lansley, the health secretary in the coalition government, recently called for the NHS to be given £5bn more than the money already planned.

There have also been widespread calls for the government to make good on the suggestion by Brexit campaigners that leaving the EU could add £350m-a-week to the NHS budget.

NHS England declined to comment on the letter.

Chris Hopson, the chief executive of NHS Providers, which represents hospitals, said that NHS underfunding meant that “it is being asked to deliver an impossible task. Put simply, the gap between what the NHS is being asked to deliver and the funding it has available is too big and is growing rapidly”, he said.

Prof John Appleby, the chief economist at the Nuffield Trust health thinktank, said the MPs were right to warn that cutting the amount of per capita funding for healthcare could mean major restrictions to NHS services being needed in the later years of this parliament, too.

“It is hard to see how this can be reconciled with providing high quality healthcare that meets the needs of a growing and ageing population,” Appleby said. “Something will have to give – whether that’s an explosion in waiting lists, patients not being able to access new drugs coming on-stream or another record set of hospital deficits.”

The government rejected the MPs’ analysis and repeated previous statements made by May and the health secretary, Jeremy Hunt, including the highly contentious £10bn claim. “The government has backed the NHS’s own plan for the future with a £10bn real terms increase in its annual funding by 2020-21, helping to ease the pressure on hospitals, GPs and mental health services. It is wrong to suggest otherwise”, said a government spokesman.

“As the chief executive of NHS England said last year, the case for the NHS has been heard and actively supported. We have allowed local government to increase social care spending in the years to 2020, with access to up to £3.5bn of new support by then.”

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/oct/30/theresa-mays-claim-on-health-funding-not-true-say-mps

“Wave of prefab homes planned to tackle UK housing crisis”

Second-class housing for second class citizens? Just watch the high-end house owners when one of these estates is planned in their back yard!

Lack of funding could scupper homelessness reforms, say MPs
Ministers are planning a new wave of prefabs in a drive to solve Britain’s housing crisis, it has been reported.

More than 100,000 pre-packed modular homes could be constructed as the government looks at ways to meet its target to provide a million new homes by 2020, according to The Sunday Telegraph.

A government white paper due out next month will include measures to encourage banks to lend to firms that construct the homes off-site before delivering them to their final destination, the paper said.

The initiative recalls the reconstruction drive which followed the second world war as prefabs sprung up across the country as the government sought to house families bombed out of their homes by the Germans.

While the prefabs of the 1940 homes were often a byword for poor quality, improvements in technology mean that such concerns are no longer an issue.

Ministers were said to have been impressed by the fact that some of the new generation of prefabs could be put up on site in as little as 24 hours, as well as the potential cost advantages.

The Sunday Telegraph quoted a government source as saying: “The first and most obvious advantage is speeding up the building of housing. There is pretty good evidence that if you did it at scale it is cheaper.”

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/oct/30/wave-of-prefab-homes-planned-to-tackle-uk-housing-crisis?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

“Secret government papers show taxpayers will pick up costs of Hinkley nuclear waste storage”

“Taxpayers will pick up the bill should the cost of storing radioactive waste produced by Britain’s newest nuclear power station soar, according to confidential documents which the government has battled to keep secret for more than a year.

The papers confirm the steps the government took to reassure French energy firm EDF and Chinese investors behind the £24bn Hinkley Point C plant that the amount they would have to pay for the storage would be capped.

The Department for Business, Energy & Industrial Strategy – in its previous incarnation as the Department for Energy and Climate Change – resisted repeated requests under the Freedom of Information Act for the release of the documents which were submitted to the European commission.

“The government has attempted to keep the costs to the taxpayer of Hinkley under wraps from the start,” said Dr Doug Parr, Greenpeace chief scientist. “It’s hardly surprising as it doesn’t look good for the government’s claim that they are trying to keep costs down for hardworking families.”

But, earlier this month, on the very last day before government officials had to submit their defence against an appeal for disclosure of the information, the department released a “Nuclear Waste Transfer Pricing Methodology Notification Paper”. Marked “commercial in confidence”, it states that “unlimited exposure to risks relating to the costs of disposing of their waste in a GDF [geological disposal facility], could not be accepted by the operator as they would prevent the operator from securing the finance necessary to undertake the project”.

Instead the document explains that there will be a “cap on the liability of the operator of the nuclear power station which would apply in a worst-case scenario”. It adds: “The UK government accepts that, in setting a cap, the residual risk, of the very worst-case scenarios where actual cost might exceed the cap, is being borne by the government.”

Separate documents confirm that the cap also applies should the cost of decommissioning the reactor at the end of its life balloon. …”

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/oct/30/hinkley-point-nuclear-waste-storage-costs?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Honiton NHS bed closure “consultation” meeting 10 November 2016

Beehive

10.00 – 12.30

Please register to guarantee your place.
Call 01392 356 084 or email d-ccg.YourFutureCare@nhs.net.

For more details see:
https://www.eastdevonalliance.org.uk/event/nhs-future-care-consultation-beehive-honiton/

Honiton is to be left with no beds at all in current plans, so it is hard to see what the town is being consulted about.

So far, EDDC top brass have issued watered-down, anodyne statements about the situation, so you might want to quiz your Tory district councillors BEFORE this meeting.