Remember, both our MPs voted for these NHS cuts

Copied in full, too important to precis.

Expect trouble. On Tuesday, health secretary Jeremy Hunt and NHS England head Simon Stevens appear before the Commons health committee. Sarah Wollaston, GP and chair, has already said she wants no one quoting the mythical “£10bn extra” the government pretends the NHS has received, yet Hunt brazenly used it again on the Today programme.

Thankfully, Stevens is unlikely to indulge in the same delusional fantasies about the state of his service. He already warned the public accounts committee in September of this “incredibly financially challenging period”, and “incredible” is the word he should cleave to. As every trust is forced to produce a financial plan that balances on paper, most – in private – admit these are fairy-tales; Chris Hopson of NHS Providers makes plain these pigs won’t fly. Hunt relies on threats and micro-managing. Just yesterday he put another three debt-ridden trusts into “special measures” to warn others their heads will be on Whitehall spikes. But there’s safety in numbers: he can’t sack them all.

Theresa May has said there is no more money: the NHS must save £22bn by 2020, despite three quarters of trusts being up to their ears in debt and missing waiting targets by miles. If she could cut police costs by 20%, why can’t the NHS, she asks. Because crime has dropped like a stone over recent decades while NHS need heads skywards, with growing numbers of the old, and collapsing social care. She risks a brutal brush with NHS reality before long.

But that’s not all. By Friday all 44 areas have to produce a sustainability and transformation plan (STP), unleashing vehement local protest against any mergers or closures.

After Lansley’s catastrophic 2012 act blew the NHS into myriad competing fragments, this re-reorganisation was meant to repair the damage and glue the fractured parts together again – a good idea. Stevens devised STPs to bind each area into a single unit, combining GPs, mental health and hospital services in one budget as a coherent whole. That might mean amalgamating maternity or A&E departments, rationalising stroke or cardiac care. Good idea, in theory.

But these plans collide with the £22bn “savings”, so how will local people trust the good intentions of these plans? NHS England has rightly taken fright: the Health Service Journal reveals there have been orders requiring each area to send every STP announcement to the headquarters communications team to make sure they “articulate tangible benefits for patients” in language that is “clear and compelling”. But it may take more than “compelling” language to assuage local fears.

Few of these plans have yet been agreed, allowing rumours and fears to fester – and when they do emerge, the government can expect no backing, not even from their own MPs and councillors. Expect every politician, irrespective of party, to dash to join the local “Save Our Hospital” demo. Any who pause to suggest some plans might be good for patients will be mown down in the stampede. Bandwagon campaigners will join every protest, regardless.

A cluster of hospital protesters went to Downing Street and the Commons last week, with petitions about closures from Barnstaple, Dewsbury, Chorley, Huddersfield, Grantham and St Helier. Each has their own circumstance, so it’s well-nigh impossible for local people to know which units should be “saved” and which rightly closed.

Among them were protesters about the Horton hospital in Banbury. At last week’s prime minister’s questions, the Tory MP for North Oxfordshire, Victoria Prentis, asked an impassioned question: “Does the prime minister share my sadness that the majority of Banbury’s babies cannot be delivered, as I was, at the Horton general hospital? Will she join with me to put pressure on the trust to reopen the unit?” The PM replied: “Every effort is being made …”

Horton swears they’ve moved heaven and earth to hire doctors but none would come: there’s a 24% vacancy rate
The Horton maternity unit closed abruptly this month after failing to hire middle-grade doctors, leaving a midwife-led unit. Part of the Oxford University Hospitals, its HR director swears they have moved heaven and earth to hire doctors but none would come: there’s a 24% vacancy rate in the district. The Horton obstetric unit lost its validation for training doctors as too few babies were being born there to qualify, so junior doctors won’t apply. They are still advertising, promising to reopen if they can recruit. Managers spell out the situation in painstaking detail, answering every possible query. But all this is to no avail.

A vociferous local Keep the Horton General campaign gathered 5,000 people to hold hands round the hospital, amid longstanding suspicions that it might be axed despite a plan to rebuild it. Every party supports the protest, with their Tory MP as militant as the rest. She says she doesn’t trust the management: “They make decisions about us without us.” She and the campaigners mistrust whatever they are told.

The Banbury Guardian relishes the story, as the local press always does. “It’s lovely how the community has come together,” Prentis says. Banbury businesses are offering any obstetric doctor recruited free shirts, free beer, cheap accommodation and discounted fees at a local private school. A packed meeting roasted NHS managers about the journey time for mothers in labour to travel to the John Radcliffe in Oxford. Nothing creates such feelgood community cohesion as a local NHS threat.

Talking to both sides, I am inclined to believe the managers’ good faith. But with deeper cuts scheduled for the years to 2020, can anyone know for certain where they might fall? At the Witney byelection, the Horton and other Oxfordshire NHS closures feature prominently. How Tory MPs get away with it beats me: they voted for these NHS cuts.

Watch this pattern repeated around the country as STP plans unfold. “Clear and compelling” language may not be enough when the NHS professionals, even the doctors, struggle to be believed. In the fog of war, with suspicions rife, local people have no way of detecting the good plans from dangerous cuts. As Stevens warned MPs: “Let’s be clear, there are going to be significant challenges, there will be choices, there will be controversies.”

The tragedy is that STPs were a progressive way to reunite NHS community, hospital, GP and social care services. But with no capital for rebuilding and even less for day-to-day spending, they risk wreckage. The cuts dig deep. How long before Simon Stevens decides to walk away?”

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/oct/18/jeremy-hunt-cant-fix-nhs

And don’t rely on an ambulance moving you from home in an emergency …

“The number of people waiting more than half-an-hour to be transferred from an ambulance into hospital emergency departments in the South West has gone up by about 50% in the last three years.

The figures, from a Labour party Freedom of Information request, showed that in 2013/14, about 17,000 patients were made to wait up to 30 minutes. In the last year, that’s gone up to about 26,000. However, the number of people waiting more than an hour has gone down.

The South Western Ambulance Service declined to comment, saying it was an NHS issue.”

BBC News, Devon Live
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-england-devon-37624865

Full Council motion on bed cuts

Motion to full Council on 26 October

“That this Council register its extreme concern at the impending loss of 71 Community beds in this part of Devon.
It is a well-known fact, particularly in coastal Devon, that there is an above average population of elderly people. Older people take longer to recuperate from illness, hospital admission and operations.

Community services are already overstretched and there is an acute lack of appropriate carers to care for people in their own homes.

Our District General Hospitals increasingly find it difficult to keep up with demand due to the fact that they cannot discharge people when they are ready because of the lack of community services.

All the Government advice has been to encourage the care of people close to their homes. So we therefore urge our 2 local MPs to consider the plight of Devon and speak on our behalf to reconsider this ill thought out decision which has come about only for financial reasons.”

Proposed by Councillor Peter Burrows, seconded by Councillor Douglas Hull and supported by Councillors Eileen Wragg, Pat Graham, Brenda Taylor and Steve Gazzard.

Click to access 261016-council-agenda-with-minute-book.pdf

“Opposing Brexit should be made an act of ‘treason’ punishable by life in prison, Tory councillor says in petition”

“Opposing Brexit should be made an act of “treason” and be punishable by life in prison, a Conservative councillor has suggested in a petition to Parliament.

Guildford councillor Christian Holliday’s petition, on the House of Commons website, calls for an amendment to the Treason Felony Act to make supporting UK membership of the European Union a crime.

He has since been suspended by the leader of Guildford Borough Council.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/10/17/opposing-brexit-should-be-made-an-act-of-treason-punishable-by-l/

Owl has just two questions:

How the heck did he become LEADER? Is the gene pool so bereft of talent in a place as big as Guildford, people such as him rise to the top?

and

If it can happen in Guildford – in how many other places is it happening and being covered up by Whips? Hhhmmm!

It may be terrible for some to contemplate but …

… the only way left to save the health service is NOT to vote Conservative.

There IS money for HS2, a new airport runway, Hinkley C, subsidies to farmers, even talk of a new Royal Yacht …

… but no money for the health service.

This IS Conservative policy. If you value the NHS then think long and think hard about your choices AT EVERY LEVEL of government now – from local to national.

You can change policies but you will have to change government to do so now.

If you want a chilling view of Conservative policies for the NHS, read:

https://www.hugoswire.org.uk/news/blog-hospital-beds-and-social-care

and:

Click to access nhs_bill.pdf

NHS: on the point of collapse – now ‘eternal winter’

Back to Chomsky:
“That’s the standard technique of privatization: defund, make sure things don’t work, people get angry, you hand it over to private capital.”
…

“Waiting times in A&E units in England this summer have been worse than every winter for the past 12 years bar one, figures show.

The colder months have traditionally been the most difficult for hospitals.

But pressures have grown so much that this summer saw one in 10 patients wait for over four hours in A&E during June, July and August.

Only last winter saw a worse performance since the target started in 2004, figures from NHS England showed.

During the summer months 90.6% of patients were seen in four hours. Hospitals are meant to deal with 95% in four hours.
The data also showed hospitals are missing a number of other key targets for cancer, routine operations and ambulance response times.

And the delays hospitals experienced in August discharging patients reached a record high. There were over 188,000 days of delays – a 30% rise on the same month the year before.
These delays occur when there are no services available in the community to care for frail patients on release.

Dr Mark Holland, president of the Society for Acute Medicine, said the figures once again showed the NHS was locked in an “eternal winter”.

“The NHS is on its knees and, this winter, areas will implode around the country. There is no reserve left.
“Over the coming weeks and months, if we see a major increase in admissions due to flu or bed closures due to norovirus, we will collapse.” …”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-37634687

Renting now outstripping buying homes

“The property rental market is booming at the expense of the sales market, making it look as if house-buying will be outstripped for the first time in eight decades next year, as home-buyers face a continued struggle to find properties they can afford.

Activity in the sales market has cooled since June’s Brexit vote and a lack of property for sale combined with rising prices are set to lead to more new lets than purchases, the UK’s largest estate agency chain, Countrywide, said.

Johnny Morris, research director at Countrywide, said: “As some would-be buyers and sellers sit on their hands, Brexit-induced uncertainty has continued to boost the rental market … September saw record activity, with increasing numbers of lets agreed and tenants choosing to renew their contracts. On current trends 2017 could be the first time since the 1930s that more homes are let than sold.”

Separate reports suggest that affording a new home is becoming increasingly difficult for would-be buyers, with asking prices rising since the summer and borrowers having to find bigger deposits than in 2015.”

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/oct/17/property-rentals-to-outstrip-sales-for-first-time-since-1930s

Small towns and their businesses suffering due to bank branch closures

“In the first report into the effect of bank branch closures on small and medium-sized businesses, seen exclusively by The Mail on Sunday, the Federation of Small Businesses has demanded greater communication from banks over reductions in services and protection for the ATM network.

Its report, Locked Out: The Impact Of Bank Branch Closures On Small Businesses, authored by policy adviser Ben Baruch, is to be revealed tomorrow following focus group meetings across the UK between July and September.

FSB policy director Martin McTague said in the study: ‘Our report shows the disproportionate impact branch closures are having in some parts of the UK and particularly in rural areas. This is concerning as evidence strongly suggests that closure programmes are both expanding and accelerating.’ …

… And the FSB said there were instances of villages and towns ‘literally running out of money’. It complained that business banking services at some Post Office branches and franchises were ‘too limited’ and that the high cost of small electronic transactions was putting some small firms off investing in new payment technology.

Gwyn Evans, chairman of FSB North Wales, said in the report: ‘Unlike in urban areas, if a branch closes in rural Wales, the business owner may face a 20-mile or more round trip to bank cash. Also, when you run a business dealing in cash, you cannot pay in a bag of change over the internet or through a smartphone app – there are limitations to even the most advanced technologies. In addition, online banking is not always easily available in rural areas.’ …

…. Malcolm Harrison, who runs Crazy Horse Coffee Shop in Invergordon in the Highlands, took part in a focus group and accused Royal Bank of Scotland of leaving the town ‘high and dry’ after it closed the last bank branch there.

He said: ‘I have not been too badly affected, but I have been here 12-odd years and am part of the furniture. Two or three businesses have closed since RBS went – a jeweller and another coffee shop, and a gift shop moved to another location.’

He said a lot of business custom moved to the next town when the branch closed, but added: ‘The biggest problem is where to get change from. Even if I put £100 to one side, it affects cash flow and I can get through that in a couple of hours. I then have to drive to the next town, leaving the shop a person down.

‘What was particularly upsetting was that the bank put a lot of effort into marketing online banking, and that affected footfall in the Invergordon branch.

‘We had an idea there was something afoot but the bank denied it was closing it. It has really been underhand in the way it has gone about this.

‘It changed its policy about not closing the last bank branch in town very quietly and left a town already suffering economically high and dry.’

https://t.co/BMW0RZ0TJQ

External auditor holding up EDDC final accounts

“Whilst our audit work on the financial statements and VFM conclusion is almost complete, as set out above, we have received a formal objection from a local elector.

We are in the process of considering this objection, which relates to the Council’s approach to recording and obtaining receipt of monies due to it from developers through agreements under s106 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990.

If we are able to conclude this work before the end of the month then, subject to the outcome of this, we anticipate issuing our audit report by the 30th September for the Council to publish audited financial statements.

If, however, the work extends beyond this timescale then we will have to withhold our audit certificate within the audit report until the work on the objection has been completed.”

Click to access 220916-agenda-item-8-combined-reports.pdf

(pages 121 and repeated on page 131)

Almost certainly related to this:

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2016/09/13/eddc-and-its-section-106-black-hole/

Cancer cluster close to Hinkley – but don’t worry …

“Cancer rates in a Somerset town close to a nuclear power station are up to six times higher than average.

Burnham-on-Sea will be named this week as the most significant ‘cancer cluster’ so far discovered near a British nuclear plant. The revelation will provide fuel for anti-nuclear campaigners who say the industry pollutes the environment and is potentially lethal for people living nearby.

The residents of Burnham, which lies five miles downwind of the Hinkley Point plant, have demanded an official inquiry into the figures, which were compiled by Dr Chris Busby, a government radiation adviser.

The study will be presented to locals on Thursday – the first anniversary of the death of Burnham resident Jo Corfield from breast cancer. Corfield’s mother, Geraldine Trythall, 86, who survived breast cancer five years ago, said yesterday: ‘We want to know exactly what is causing all these cancers. We have a right to know.’

Some residents are even moving away from the area. The parents of 18-year-old David Lidgey, who contracted leukaemia three years ago, strongly suspect the power station is to blame for his illness. Susan and Rob Lidgey said they are in the process of moving a mile inland from Burnham in a move to avoid further health effects.

Campaigners believe that radioactive discharge from Hinkley Point into the sea could explain the resort’s high cancer rate. Busby, also a member of the Government’s committee on depleted uranium, believes dangerous material from Hinkley Point is contaminating tidal sediment around power stations.

When the mudflats off Burnham are exposed at low water, he believes that radioactive particles are carried away on the wind and inhaled by residents. Of the 95 people diagnosed with cancer in Burnham since 1989, more than half took part in sea-based activities such as watersports or bait-digging. Only one in five cancer sufferers was a smoker.

‘We have known since the 1960s the mechanism by which radioactive particles come ashore, and we will be worrying about this problem for a few hundred years to come,’ said Dr Vyvyan Howard, senior anatomy lecturer at Liverpool University and an expert on the effects of toxins on human tissue.

The study, which investigated cancer cases in Burnham since 1998, found residents are 5.95 times more likely to get kidney cancer. The probability that this is coincidental is just one in a thousand.

It also found that cases of cervical cancer are 5.6 times higher than the national average, while leukaemia rates are more than four times above the norm. Women from Burnham have more than double the risk of breast cancer, with a one in 2,500 probability the figures are chance, according to cases over the past six years.

It is the first time both adults and children living near a nuclear plant have been examined for such a broad range of cancers and the first attempt to examine the incidence of the illness rather than deaths.

‘We see a picture confirming my fears that Hinkley discharges are responsible for severe health problems. All the epidemiology points to that conclusion,’ said Busby, who is a member of the Independent Advisory Committee on Medical Aspects of Radiation in the Environment. Busby urged similar research to be carried out at sites across the UK.

The range of cancers examined in the report have all been linked to the effects of radiation from studies on Hiroshima survivors. However, no scientific link has yet been established between low-level radioactive discharge of the type from Hinkley Point and cancer.

Last year Busby identified a leukaemia cluster near Chepstow on the banks of the Severn near Oldbury power station, north of Burnham. Another study in Seascale, close to the Sellafield nuclear reprocessing plant in Cumbria, observed cases of leukaemia in children under 14 between 1950 and 1983.

A Department of Health spokesman said: ‘No known health effects have been shown to be associated with radioactive discharges from current nuclear sites.’

BNFL, which is decommissioning one of the reactors at the Hinkley site, dismissed Busby’s findings, adding that his previous work had been ‘heavily criticised’ by health experts.”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2002/jul/14/greenpolitics.science

“No extra money for NHS, Theresa May tells health chief”

“Theresa May has told the head of the NHS that it will get no extra money despite rapidly escalating problems that led to warnings this week that hospitals are close to breaking point.

The prime minister dashed any hopes of a cash boost in next month’s autumn statement when she met Simon Stevens, the chief executive of NHS England, senior NHS sources have told the Guardian. Instead she told him last month that the NHS should urgently focus on making efficiencies to fill the £22bn hole in its finances and not publicly seek more than the “£10bn extra” that ministers insist they have already pledged to provide during this parliament.

She told him the NHS could learn from the painful cuts to the Home Office and Ministry of Defence budgets that she and Philip Hammond, the chancellor, had overseen when they were in charge of those departments, according to senior figures in the NHS who were given an account of the discussion.

Senior Whitehall sources have confirmed that Hammond’s statement on 23 November will contain no new money for the NHS, despite increasingly vocal pleas from key NHS organisations and the public’s expectation of extra health spending if Britain voted to leave the EU.

NHS Providers, which represents 238 NHS trusts, last week accused ministers of perpetuating “a bit of a fantasy world” on how well the NHS is doing after the worst-ever performance figures for key waiting time targets for A&E care, planned hospital operations and cancer treatments led to warnings that it was starting to buckle under the strain of unprecedented demand.

Health experts warned that the NHS would have to ration treatment, shut hospital units and cut staff if it gets no extra money soon.

Nigel Edwards, chief executive of the Nuffield Trust health thinktank, said: “If the government has firmly decided not to revisit NHS funding, this underlines that the health service faces four very difficult years. In particular, balancing the books in 2018 and 2019 when funding will flatline looks all but impossible with the current level of services.

“If more money from tax or borrowing is ruled out, the only choices left may be even less attractive, including reducing access and services, closures and reductions in staff,” he said.

Jeremy Hunt, the health secretary, and Jim Mackey, the chief executive of the health service’s financial regulator, NHS Improvement, also attended the 8 September meeting, which was Stevens’ and Mackey’s first encounter with the prime minister.

“No 10’s message at the meeting was quite blunt and stark, that there will be no more money. Theresa May and Philip Hammond say that they presided over big efficiency programmes at the Home Office and MoD and didn’t whinge about it. Their view is that the NHS is already doing very well, but that’s head in the sand stuff,” said one NHS insider who was among those briefed on the meeting.

NHS leaders privately fear that May’s remarks indicate that she will be much tougher on the service’s pleas for more cash than David Cameron and does not appear to appreciate the extent of its deepening problems. She is said to be sympathetic to the view of many senior Treasury officials that, as one NHS source put it, “always giving the NHS more money is throwing good money after bad, like pouring water on to sand”.

May’s stance raises questions over the future of Stevens, who is preparing to give evidence on the NHS’s finances to the Commons health select committee on Tuesday. The NHS boss, who had a close relationship with Cameron and George Osborne, has recently irritated No 10 by publicly questioning the accuracy of the government’s claim – which May repeated at prime minister’s questions on Wednesday – that the NHS will receive £10bn extra by 2020.

He told the public accounts committee last month: “The government would record it as £10bn. The health committee recorded it a little differently. There is an apples and pears issue there.”

Stevens has welcomed the fact that the £8bn boost Osborne pledged during last year’s general election campaign was “frontloaded” to give the NHS £3.8bn more this year, a rise of 1.7%, as he had requested. But he highlighted that the service had not got the sums it needed for 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019-20. On current plans, it is due to receive increases of just 0.6%, 0.2% and 0.1% respectively, even though demand for core NHS services such as A&E care is rising at 3% or 4% a year.

Chris Ham, chief executive of The King’s Fund thinktank, said that any policy of providing no more money was unwise, “simply not credible” and would threaten standards of NHS care. “If these accounts are true, then it is clear that Downing Street does not yet fully understand the impact on patients of the huge pressures facing the NHS.

“The view from the top of government appears to be that the NHS has been given the extra money it asked for and should deliver what is expected of it. But this misses the point that demand for services is rising rapidly and the NHS is managing with the lowest funding increases in its history,” he said.

A Downing Street spokesman said he could not comment on what May, Stevens and Mackey had discussed because it had been a private meeting .”

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/oct/14/no-extra-money-for-nhs-theresa-may-tells-health-chief

When is a village not a village?

When it has 10,000 houses – it’s a TOWN!

“Garden villages scheme gets cash boost

An extra £1m has been put behind the garden villages programme, taking the total government funding on offer to £7m.

Housing minister Gavin Barwell urged councils to apply for the money as “we want to ensure everyone has an affordable place to live and that means we’ve got to build more homes”.

The scheme assists the development of new villages of between 1,500 and 10,000 homes planned around green spaces.

It already supports developments planned at Bicester, Didcot, Basingstoke, a site near to Braintree, Essex, and the former RAF Deensthorpe airfield near Corby, Northamptonshire.

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2016/10/garden-villages-scheme-gets-cash-boost

Two mid-Devon Conservative councillors removed from committees following investigation

News announced in a press release, presumably from the council, that very carefully excludes the reasons why they were removed:

http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/two-mid-devon-conservative-councillors-removed-from-committees-following-investigation/story-29809275-detail/story.html

Neil Parish offers to meet Honiton constituents about NHS cuts – in Tiverton!

Claire Wright meeting with Devon Senior Voice about health service cuts in Honiton:

“MP, Neil Parish, had submitted a statement saying he was opposed to the cuts. He has offered to meet residents … in Tiverton.

The meeting resolved to set up a campaign group to fight the plans. I wish them lots of luck.

http://www.claire-wright.org/index.php/post/well_over_100_people_packed_the_mackarness_hall_last_night_to_make_their_op

Hugo Swire bans Claire Wright from a meeting in her ward

“Hugo Swire bars me from a meeting about Tipton St John Primary School flooding problems

I was bizarrely barred from a meeting in my own ward this lunchtime, with East Devon’s MP and the chief executive of the Environment Agency, James Bevan, who met with Tipton St John school staff about the ongoing challenges of flooding at the school – an issue I have been active on for three years.

I have been involved in discussions on how the situation at Tipton St John may be remedied since I was elected as a Devon County councillor in 2013.

I asked to attend the meeting this morning, however, was informed by Hugo Swire’s office that I would not be welcome as he was “keeping the meeting very small and focused and had to limit numbers.”

I was very disappointed about being excluded as crucially important issues would be discussed that I have been actively involved with. Last year I provided funding from my county council locality budget for a flood survey and helped to clear up after at least two flooding events, arranging with the chief fire officer for Devon and Somerset, for the fire and rescue service to be involved in these clear ups.

I have attended meetings with residents about the future of the school and worked with the school – and the community on trying to find a solution to the flooding problems.

As the Devon County councillor for Tipton St John with a clear interest and involvement in supporting the community I would have thought it was entirely appropriate that I should have been invited to a meeting with the chief executive of the Environment Agency.

It was a poor decision”

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

Swire on health and social care

Summary:

“Home care is currently in trouble with local authorities having cut their funding.”

NO! NO! NO! YOUR GOVERNMENT HAS CUT FUNDING TO LOCAL AUTHORITIES!

“… social care is means tested and supplied by the local authority, whose grants, throughout the recent period of austerity have been cut.”

BY YOUR GOVERNMENT!

“As to the blame game, it simply won’t get us anywhere.”

YES IT WILL – YOUR GOVERNMENT’S AUSTERITY POLICY GOT US HERE! YOUR GOVERNMENT HAS CHOSEN TO STARVE THE NHS TO FEED HS2 FOR EXAMPLE. IT HAS INSISTED ON TARGETS THAT CANNOT BE MET BY A DEFUNDED NHS AND THEN FINES HOSPITALS FOR NOT REACHING THEM!

(And be honest, if it was Labour in power YOU would be blaming Corbyn!)

“Britain spends less as a share of its GDP on health care than most other rich countries. If taxpayers want that to change they will have to pay for it. And yes that might mean patients, diverted from expensive systems of care into cheaper ones.”

NO! IT CAN SPEND MORE ON THE NHS – IT WAS A CHOICE OF YOUR GOVERNMENT TO SPEND LESS AND UNDERFUND HEALTH CARE COMPARED TO OTHER COUNTRIEs AND TO SPEND MORE ON WASTEFUL VANITY PROJECTS. THIS IS A RICH FIRST-WORLD COUNTRY NOT A POOR THIRD WORLD ONE?

“As for surgeries, why can’t doctors deal with some patients by e-mail? it would mean they could devote more time to the seriously ill when they come in. Some people already pay for prescriptions, as they do for dental health, so is the answer for some other services to be charged for? ”

OWL CAN BARELY REPLY. YOU KNOW IMMEDIATELY THAT THIS MAN HAS PRIVATE HEALTH CARE! CAN YOU IMAGINE PEOPLE DESCRIBING THEIR SYMPTOMS BY EMAIL! AND HOW MUCH EMAIL DOCTORS WOULD HAVE TO PLOUGH THROUGH! AND WHAT IF THE PATIENT THINKS THE PROBLEM HAS TO GO TO EMAIL AND IT TURNS OUT TO BE AN EMERGENCY! OR WHAT IF EMAIL GOES DOWN OR YOU HAVE NO COMPUTER? WHAT ABOUT SECURITY AND CONFIDENTIALITY?

“I have an online booking system for my surgery but my doctor tells me only a quarter of people turn up”

SO DOESN’T THAT MEAN EITHER IT IS NOT FIT FOR PURPOSE OR EVEN THAT THERE IS MORE SPACE FOR THOSE WHO DO TURN UP ON THE DAY!

And finally:

“These are only ideas, and for many they will feel like a bitter pill to swallow.”

INDEED A BITTER PILL BUT, FORTUNATELY WE DON’T HAVE TO SWALLOW IT … WE CAN FIGHT BACK.

But it’s useful to see Mr Swire’s total toeing of his party’s line. We do know where we stand with him and his party – and for the majority it is NOT shoulder to shoulder but eyeball to eyeball.

Neighbourhood planners beware – developers are out to get you

A bit legalese but VERY IMPORTANT for those currently putting together Neighbourhood Plans.

Developers have won a High Court challenge over a district council’s decision to make a neighbourhood plan.

In Stonegate Homes Ltd & Anor, R (On the Application Of) v Horsham District Council [2016] EWHC 2512 Horsham took the decision to make the Henfield Neighbourhood Plan on 27 April 2016. This followed a referendum earlier in the month where the plan was passed with a vote of 94.3% of the voters.

The claimants were developers who were promoting a 72-dwelling site on the western side of Henfield. They have appealed Horsham’s refusal of their planning application for that site in November 2014; the decision is with the Communities Secretary for determination.

The claimants issued a claim under section 61N of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) (the 1990 Act) over Horsham’s making of the neighbourhood plan. They put forward three grounds, which were that:

The defendant council had failed to lawfully assess reasonable alternatives to the spatial strategy as established by the neighbourhood plan and, in particular, the alternative of permitting development on the western edge of Henfield;

The defendant had failed to consider any alternatives to the Built-Up Area Boundary (BUAB) as established in the neighbourhood plan and had failed to act rationally in the selection of the BUAB;

The defendant and/or the examining inspector failed to give any or adequate reasons as to why the neighbourhood plan met EU obligations.

The council as the defendant submitted in response:

(i) That the challenge was limited in scope by section 38A(4) and section 38A(6) of the 2004 Act to a consideration of whether the making of the neighbourhood development order would breach or would otherwise be incompatible with any EU obligation or any of the Convention rights;

(ii) Even if the scope of challenge was not so limited the option of developing land to the west of Henfield and that of including the “Barratt site” within the BUAB of Henfield had been adequately dealt with by the examiner and the defendant in a proportionate way and the reasons that had been advanced were adequate.

However, Mrs Justice Patterson found for the claimants across a number of grounds:

The plan was quashed on four grounds:

It is incumbent upon the makers of the plan, the Independent Examiner and the making authority when certifying in its opinion that the plan was compliant with EU law to employ reasoning that is sound in the public law (Wednesbury) sense.

The maker of the plan is obliged to undertake an objective assessment of the policies of the plan when discharging the above duty.

That alternatives need to be accurately presented in order for the SA/SEA of a plan to comply with European law.

All key policies of the plan need to be assessed against reasonable alternatives to have a EU law compliant SA/SEA.

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=28646%3Aboundaries-of-the-soft-touch-approach&catid=63&Itemid=31

Source: http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=28643%3Adevelopers-win-high-court-battle-over-neighbourhood-plan&catid=63&Itemid=31

Swire’s trips to Maldives fail to pay off

Hugo Swire was particularly fond of the Maldives during his time as Foreign Officer minister and made many tweets about its political situation and hope for future relations:

“The Maldives has withdrawn from the Commonwealth, accusing it of interfering in domestic affairs and “unfair and unjust” treatment.

The Commonwealth had warned the Maldives of possible suspension if it failed to show progress on democracy.
It has faced questions over freedom of speech, the detention of opponents and the independence of the judiciary.
The Indian Ocean nation became a multiparty democracy in 2008 after decades of autocratic rule.

The Maldives foreign ministry said in a statement: “The decision to leave the Commonwealth was difficult, but inevitable.

“Regrettably, the Commonwealth has not recognised progress and achievements that the Maldives accomplished in cultivating a culture of democracy in the country and in building and strengthening democratic institutions.”
It said that President Abdulla Yameen’s government had introduced a raft of measures promoting human rights and strengthening the rule of law.” …

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-37647310

Swire challenges “opposition”

…””My local political opposition [is] going to find it rather difficult to criticise me now… I’m afraid I’m going to slightly shoot their fox,” he says.

“Because all the things they say I don’t comment on, I now can and am… I no longer have to support the government.”

Topping the agenda in his newly assumed role as a backbencher is the region’s ailing infrastructure.

He shares the view that for too long the Westcountry has “suffered unfairly” from underinvestment.

“Just imagine if HS2 wasn’t going to go ahead – how much money that would release for the kind of infrastructure development we need in the South West,” he states.

“We had a good meeting with Network Rail and GWR this week, looking at their new rolling stock and the challenges to upgrade the line. [But] that’s something we’re going to have to really watch and make sure the funding is in place.”

He is also following developments with Devon Success Regime, including the campaign to keep beds in the local community hospital.

And he wants to make sure the region catches up with the roll-out of superfast broadband services.

“Every single Conservative candidate in the South West was elected on a Conservative manifesto, and it is up to every single member of Parliament to ensure their delivery is as good as their pledge,” he says.

Going from being one of he most well-travelled ministers in Government to a member of the “rank and file” has taken some getting used to.

The responsibilities associated with Mr Swire’s previous role made him heavily reliant on staff to manage his diary and provide briefings. Now, he admits he often struggles to make it to meetings on time.

However, he is staying involved with international affairs as deputy chairman of the Commonwealth Enterprise and Investment Council and head of the Conservative Middle East Council.

He says he hopes to see the UK taking more of a lead on Syria – pointing out that it would be a “wonderful opportunity” for Boris Johnson “to show what hes made of”.

“You’ve got Putin.. responsible for some biblical atrocities [and] I weep for the people of Syria,” he says. “This is a good opportunity for Britain to show some leadership.”

http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/no-plans-for-a-quiet-retirement-to-the-backbenches-for-devon-mp/story-29806840-detail/story.html

Er, not quite true Hugo – your work with the Conservative Middle East Council seems to be taking up an awful lot of your time – breakfast meeting the Egyptian Ambassador (London), talking at a Conservative fundraising dinner in Kensington and Chelsea (London), meeting about Christians in Syria (London), chatting to the Saudi Foreign Minister … still busy on non- constituency matters in London.

And heaven only knows how busy you will be as deputy chairman of the Commonwealth Enterprise and Investment Council!

Oh, and as for getting to meetings on time – don’t forget to add in the time it takes to get from your mid-Devon second home to your constituency.

“Greater Exeter” – the fun starts here

Other Chief Executives and Senior Officers of “Greater Exeter” will no doubt demand parity – or better …

“Councillors ‘unaware’ of Teignbridge chief’s 12% pay rise”

The ruling Conservative group said Nicola Bulbeck’s rise reflected her additional responsibilities.

Councillors said they were unaware of a proposal to increase a chief executive’s pay by 12% – taking it to £141,000 – before it was passed.
Nicola Bulbeck’s £15,000 pay rise has been called “excessive” by opposition Liberal Democrat politicians on Teignbridge District Council.

But the ruling Conservative group said information about the rise was given to all councillors in June.

Lib Dems said they had not “knowingly” approved the rise last month.

More on the council row, plus more Devon and Cornwall news
The Conservatives said the rise reflected additional responsibilities for Ms Bulbeck.

It followed a cut to the number of posts in the council’s senior management team from 18 to six.

Liberal Democrat leader Gordon Hook said: “A meeting a couple of weeks ago had a report to members and there was a web link to the statement of accounts.

“On page 84 there is one line about the chief executive’s salary increase.

“There was no indication it was in the booklet or that the information was going to be brought as an item to members, which it should be.

“We accepted the report, but we were given no lead that that was part of the package.”

Councillor Jeremy Christophers, leader of Teignbridge District Council, said that the rise, which includes pension contributions of £22,000, had “always been available and updated on the website”.

“Figures have been publicly available in the annual accounts since June and were presented at audit scrutiny committee on 21 July and 14 September and full council on 26 September.
“Teignbridge proactively and routinely publishes all possible data to enhance our transparency and accountability and help residents understand how we work and the services we provide,” he said.”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-37642347