“EDF delays Hinkley Point decision to consult works council”

Another decision delay announced. What is our LEP doing with the money set aside for this project? Is it training people whose skills will need to be upgraded in a few years time because they are out of date? What happens if some other major industry needs different skills in the meantime – e.g. tourism (lol!) or marine industries – how long will it take the Hinkley C nuclear tanker to turn round?

“French utility EDF (EDF.PA) has delayed the final investment decision for its Hinkley Point nuclear project in Britain until after its May 12 shareholders’ meeting to allow time to consult its works council, two sources familiar with the situation told Reuters.

French Economy Minister Emmanuel Macron told parliament last month that a final investment decision on the 18 billion pound UK project would be taken by early May and that delaying the decision would create a strong risk that EDF (EDF.PA) could lose the contract.

The sources said EDF Chief Executive Jean-Bernard Levy told a board meeting on Friday afternoon that he had decided to consult the firm’s works council, which had threatened legal action unless it was allowed to give its view on the project.

“This procedure will take several weeks,” one of the sources said.

EDF declined to comment.

The new delay – several deadlines have passed without a decision in the past two years – will give EDF the chance to smooth relations with its unions, who consider the project so risky that it threatens the company’s survival.

Sources have told Reuters that at least five of the six union representatives on EDF’s 18-seat board plan to vote against the project and Force Ouvriere (FO), one of EDF’s more radical unions, has threatened to strike.

A third source said Levy wants to take time to appease the social climate at EDF, which is 85 percent state-owned.

Former chief financial officer Thomas Piquemal resigned over the project last month, while employee shareholders’ association EAS demands that the state buy out EDF’s minority shareholders, saying the government abuses its majority control to use EDF as a lever for its energy policy.

At a meeting at President Francois Hollande’s palace on Wednesday, the government did not agree on whether to give extra financial support for EDF, which is weighed down by 37 billion euros (£28.8 billion) of net debt and struggles with record-low power prices.

French media have reported that Macron is not in favour of recapitalising EDF now, because investments for Hinkley Point and a 50 billion euro upgrade of France’s nuclear reactors are several years away.

Greenpeace UK director John Sauven said the UK government urgently needs to back renewable energy as a more reliable alternative to nuclear.”

http://feeds.reuters.com/~r/Reuters/UKTopNews/~3/QaksMSLtJ74/uk-edf-nuclear-britain-idUKKCN0XJ25S

“Illicit enrichment”- tell the government what you think about this possible new offence

“The Government is consulting on the creation of an illicit enrichment offence, “for use when a public official has a significant and inexplicable increase in their assets”.

The proposed offence is included in a package of measures in the Government’s latest action plan for anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist finance.

The Home Office said the aim was to make the UK “a more hostile place for those seeking to move, hide or use the proceeds of crime or corruption”.
The proposals subject to consultation also include the creation of a new power to require individuals to declare their sources of wealth, and the creation of a linked power to seek forfeiture of assets if they fail to declare their sources of wealth.

The closing date for responses to be submitted is 2 June 2016.”

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=26736%3Ahome-office-targets-public-officials-with-plans-for-illicit-enrichment-offence&catid=59&Itemid=27

Page 57 of this document:

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=26736%3Ahome-office-targets-public-officials-with-plans-for-illicit-enrichment-offence&catid=59&Itemid=27

gives a list of questions the government wants to consult on and

“The Treasury welcomes your views in response to the questions posed in this Annex and would be keen to hear views on how to best deal with the issues raised with a view to making the supervisory regime more effective. This will help ensure evidence-based policy decisions in these areas.

Electronic responses are preferred and should be sent to: aml@hmtreasury.gsi.gov.uk

Questions or enquiries specifically relating to this consultation should also be sent to the above email address.

Please include the words CONSULTATION VIEWS or CONSULTATION ENQUIRY (as appropriate) in your email title. If you do not wish your views to be published alongside the Government response to this consultation, please clearly specify this in your email.

Hard copy responses may be submitted to:

Review of AML/CFT Supervision Sanctions and Illicit Finance Team 1st Floor Blue
HM Treasury
1 Horse Guards Road London
SW1A 2HQ

“Halt Hinkley Point until Brussels approves state aid plans, Osborne told”

“French government support for EDF to continue UK nuclear project might break EU competition rules, says Greenpeace:

Greenpeace has written to George Osborne warning him not to allow the Hinkley Point C nuclear project to proceed until the European commission approves further planned support from the French state.

The letter, which is signed jointly with the energy supplier Ecotricity, follows legal advice that plans for state help from France’s government to enable EDF to continue with the reactor scheme could break European competition rules.

The legal opinion was given to Greenpeace by three competition barristers from Monckton Chambers in London and came as EDF held a board meeting on Friday in Paris to discuss once again the controversial £18bn project in Somerset.

“The only way Hinkley can be kept alive is on the life support machine of state aid. EDF, if it is to stay in business, needs a new vision which is not looking backwards,” said John Sauven, executive director of Greenpeace UK.

“The UK government needs to stop penalising the UK renewable energy industry in favour of propping up an ailing state-owned nuclear industry in France.”

Dale Vince, founder of Ecotricity, said it was time for everyone to realise that it was the end of the road for Hinkley Point.

“Illegal state aid is one thing, and we’ll work with Greenpeace to challenge that if it happens, but it’s not just financial issues, there are technical problems with Hinkley Point too – EDF are yet to build one of these reactors and their first two attempts are, between them, 16 years late and billions over budget,” he added.

The letter was also sent to Amber Rudd, the energy and climate change Secretary. Rudd and Osborne have been key figures in trying to steer investment into new nuclear plants.

EDF, which is 85% owned by the French state, is struggling against a mountain of debt and has told ministers it will not build Hinkley unless it obtains help from France’s government.

The country’s economy minister, Emmanuel Macron, has talked about taking future dividends in shares rather than cash and a range of other options to lessen the financial burden on EDF.

It is these proposals that the London barristers believe would need clearance from Brussels, a process that would subject Hinkley to further delays.

Molly Scott Cato, Green MEP for the area covering the plant, said: “The numbers for the Hinkley deal have never stacked up and it is clear that the commercial case for this white elephant is dead. We have now a political battle where the stakes for both the UK and France are just too high to admit failure. But we cannot let this override EU rules on state aid or fair competition.”

http://gu.com/p/4th9q

“London’s luxury property market is crumbling and that’ bad news for affordable housing”

Although this is about London, it applies to all areas of England.

“The latest set of evidence shows that the luxury market is crumbling and this is really bad news for affordable housing in London. If luxury properties don’t tempt the rich then those in a lower band will, pricing out prospective buyers with less money.

Houses in the most sought after areas in London — such as Belgravia, Kensington, and Knightsbridge — are selling at a huge discount, according to LonRes data cited by the Financial Times.

For example, 59% of sales in Knightsbridge and Belgravia were selling at a discount of at least 10%. Meanwhile over half the properties on sale in Mayfair and Marylebone had similar discounts applied. …

… Firstly, anyone buying a property over £1.5 million is stung with a huge 12% stamp duty fee. …

… Secondly, if you own more than one property, a 3% stamp duty is applied. The new fee came into force in April and is applicable to buy-to-let investors and those who are buying a second home. This 3% fee is on top of the extra cost of a new purchase in April.

The knock-on effect on affordable housing

… Investors will instead consider buying properties that fall within a lower bracket with lower fees. This only squeezes the already squeezed market.

… So what does this all mean? As London’s richest slip from luxury properties to avoid fees, they’re likely to turn so-called affordable housing into something completely unaffordable for the average Londoner.

http://uk.businessinsider.com/lonres-luxury-properties-in-london-data-and-affordable-housing-impact-2016-4

Tory Council is anti-academy

West Sussex’s Conservative-led county council has joined the chorus of opposition to the government’s plan to turn all state schools into academies, saying it could hurt provision for vulnerable children and undermine the local economy.

In a letter to the education secretary, Nicky Morgan, West Sussex county council leader, Louise Goldsmith, said the council was united in opposing the proposals in Morgan’s education white paper, with no evidence that the county’s schools would be improved.

“I have reservations that the ‘one size fits all’ academies approach that ministers are proposing does not seem to promote any benefits to pupils and parents in West Sussex,” Goldsmith wrote. “We have very specific concerns about how vulnerable children will fare under the proposals – a statutory responsibility that will rightly remain with the council but with very few powers to help us to fulfil that duty.”

http://gu.com/p/4thv3

Greendale pub causing concern in Exeter – fears it may be base for squatters

Uncertainty surrounds the future of a city centre pub – almost four months after it closed. The Mint on Fore Street shut its doors on New Year’s Eve and is yet to reopen. Signs in the windows say it will remain closed “until further notice”.

Owners Greendale Leisure Ltd, based at Woodbury Salterton, have remained tight-lipped about their plans for the venue.
Nearby businesses are unclear about what will happen to the pub.

David O’Callaghan, of Gentry barber shop, said: “There have been all sorts of rumours, but no one is any the wiser. “We have seen people taking out pumps, coolers, chilling units, the fruit machine and pool table. So maybe they aren’t going to keep it as a pub.
“It’s an eyesore, and I’m concerned squatters are going to get in there.”

http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/Fears-raised-squatters-enter-closed-Exeter-pub/story-29152755-detail/story.html

Greendale is host to Hugo Swire’s constituency office in Woodbury and he recently opened one of their leisure venues for them. Hugo would surely wish them to be conscientious and public-spirited businessmen.

It isn’t just Knowle where civil servants refuse to provide taxpayers information – MPs suffer too!

” The chairs of two parliamentary select committees have accused the top civil servant at the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills (BIS) of misleading MPs over the closure its biggest office outside London.

Iain Wright, chair of the business committee, and Meg Hillier, chair of the public accounts committee, have written to Martin Donnelly, the BIS permanent secretary, calling on him to release information on the department’s estimate of the costs of the closure of its St Paul’s Place office in Sheffield, which employs around 240 people. …

… this week the department was forced to admit that employing people in its Sheffield office costs less than a third of what it costs in London.

In an answer to a written question from the MP for Sheffield Central, Paul Blomfield, the universities and science minister, Jo Johnson, said the annual cost of rent, rates and maintenance for an employee at the office in Sheffield was £3,190, compared with £9,750 at the headquarters on Victoria Street in London. …

… In the letter, the two committee chairs said the information relating to the reorganisation of the department that the permanent secretary had provided was “wholly unsatisfactory” and his answers in oral evidence to their committees had been “obfuscatory, if not misleading”.

“Your refusal to disclose the information we have sought is unhelpful, unjustified and is impeding our ability to fulfil our scrutiny functions,” they said.

“[We] are asking for precise information about the work done to estimate the costs of different scenarios in relation to the closure of the Sheffield office and transfer of posts to London. Specifically, could you please provide us with a copy of the document entitled BIS 2020 Finance and Headcount Outline, and any other document which has informed decisions relating to the Sheffield office.”

The letter asked that the information be provided before Donnelly appears before the public accounts committee on 27 April. …

… “Taxpayers deserve better from those working on their behalf. We expect the permanent secretary to respond swiftly and with clarity on the points of concern raised by our committees, which includes releasing the information we have requested. Only then can the decision to close the BIS Sheffield office be properly scrutinised.”

Wright, the business, innovation and skills committee chair, said: “The permanent secretary is accountable for the use of public funds and needs to demonstrate the financial rationale and evidence-based business case for the decision to cut jobs in Sheffield and centralise policymaking in London. The permanent secretary has a responsibility to enable us to scrutinise the running of his department and disclose this information.” …

… Donnelly stressed that the department had not yet reached final decisions about the number of roles in the Sheffield office that would be made redundant and the number that would be moved to London. He said there had, therefore, been no formal cost-benefit analysis of the decision to close the Sheffield office.”

http://gu.com/p/4tgdh

Hinkley C: “Power for 60 years” … in your dreams!

Our Energy Minister, Amber Rudd, has written a public letter (i.e. press release) that states that one benefit of Hinkley C is that ” … it will power homes for 60 years … and we are only paying for 35″.

Oh, Amber, Amber, your innocence pains Owl!

In year 36 (if we ever get there) EDF and Chinese investors will almost certainly suddenly find massive unanticipated and unplanned-for major difficulties that will, sadly, mean that Hinkley C must close.

That’s politics, Amber.

Knowle: EDDC helping Pegasus to get its ducks in a row

“An EDDC spokeswoman said: “We have received an application from Pegasus, but we will require some additional information before we can validate it. Once we have everything that we need, the application will be advertised, posted on our website and the community consulted in the usual way.”

The developer said ‘major changes’ had been made to its original vision ahead of the plans being submitted. Under the plans, the site’s 19th century former hotel and 1970s offices will be demolished to make way for dwellings for over-60s. The Caretaker’s Cottage will remain. Much of the parkland will remain in public ownership. A restaurant and gym facilities also feature in proposals.”

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/delay_to_plan_for_115_homes_gym_and_restaurant_at_knowle_sidmouth_1_4503444

Exmouth: 95% of those who voted want more consultation on seafront plans

Which means we return to the question: who does a council represent – its developers or its voters? What should a council’s over-arching aim be: economic growth at all costs or social and environmental representation?

Back to the drawing board, EDDC. Or ignore your voters?

http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/Exmouth-Seafront-94-cent-vote-consultation/story-29151530-detail/story.html

Community Hospitals: the more you raise to improve them, the more rent the NHS will charge …

“Sidmouth GPs are outraged about what they call the Catch 22 on community hospitals: the more the community has raised to improve the facilities, the more the commercial rent will be; so the less affordable it will be for health providers; so the owner (ie Jeremy Hunt) will be required by law to close it down and sell it off as real estate.

Meanwhile Mr Swire is delightfully rattled. Until he started to protest too much most people did not really care where his family’s £250 million income last year came from or how much tax was paid on it. Claire [Wright] is right… this one will run and run.

—
Robert Crick

Whose standards?

In the list of complaints received about councillors published recently by the Standards Committee is this one:

“Town Councillor

Complaint regarding not declaring a personal interest
Passed to MO for assessment

The subject member is a member of Axminster Lodge of Honour & Virtue and participated in and voted upon an approved payment for Axminster Freemasons.”

Click to access 190416standardscttecombinedagenda.pdf

page 15

Fat cats getting fatter

“… A financial elite plunged the country into calamity and effectively got away with it unscathed, while workers suffered the longest period of reduced pay since the Victorian era. Meanwhile public services, social security and secure jobs were slashed. It has become increasingly clear – as the Panama Papers underscored – that a significant chunk of our economic elite simply do not like paying tax in this country.

The problem is that this injustice is met with resignation, rather than anger. While rage at the smaller misdemeanours of the poor – such as benefit fraud – seems easy to stir, destructive behaviour on this far greater scale is discussed like the weather. The rich pay themselves ludicrous sums of money, major corporations avoid tax, sometimes it rains …”

http://gu.com/p/4tg5d

GPs get cash injection

“NHS chiefs in England have announced a five-year plan to help GP surgeries “get back on their feet” and to improve access for patients.

The rescue package will see an extra £2.4bn a year ploughed into services by 2020 – a rise of 14% once inflation is taken into account.

It will pay for 5,000 more GPs and extra staff to boost practices.
It comes after warnings from the profession that the future of general practice was at real risk.

Rising patient demand coupled with a squeeze in funding has led to patients facing longer waits for appointments and increasing difficulties getting through to their local surgeries.

Both the British Medical Association and Royal College of GPs have been increasingly vocal about the pressures over the past year.”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-36087286

Yet another Conservative climb down- this time on rogue landlords and perrs vote for parish councils to oppose developers!

“Rogue letting agents will be hit by a tough new scheme to stop them running off with tenants’ cash after a Tory climbdown. Under-fire ministers added strict rules to their Housing Bill at the last minute to avoid an embarrassing House of Lords defeat. The ‘dog’s breakfast’ Tory Bill, which launches Starter Homes and extends the Right to Buy, has already suffered seven defeats and as many U-turns.

Now a new clause, drafted hours before a planned vote, will force private letting agents to put cash in Client Money Protection accounts. Until now agents could keep rent and deposits in their own accounts while passing it between landlords and tenants. But that left customers penniless if agents went bust or ran off criminally with the cash. …

… The rules were approved without opposition by the House of Lords.

Tory Housing Minister Baroness Williams said she was pleased to wave through the change after working with Labour and the Lib Dems. She added: “I listened very carefully to the points they’ve made.”

But meanwhile, the Housing Bill still suffered its seventh defeat tonight.

Peers voted 251-194 to let parish councils and neighbourhood forums appeal against developments which ride roughshod over their overall plans for the local area.”

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/tough-new-laws-force-rogue-7797054

Another voice on the unreliability of party politics

“… Our electoral system reliably herds voters through the old party gates at general election time, regardless of where we graze mid-term. Traditional allegiances have proved resilient enough in the past that the safe bet is on their endurance. We probably won’t get a grand political realignment out of this referendum, but we might learn how much we need one.”

http://gu.com/p/4tf69

“Academy plans pose ‘significant risk’ to government finance” says National Audit Office

… “In a critical assessment, the Department for Education’s annual accounts have been rated as “adverse” by the National Audit Office, which said there was no clear view of academies’ spending. Adverse is the most negative opinion that an auditor can give.” …

http://gu.com/p/4tfn6

Claire Wright continues to fight for tax transparency

“LAST week the Echo revealed that out of four local MPs asked about their tax affairs, only one (Ben Bradshaw) answered the questions put. And one (East Devon’s MP, Hugo Swire) wrote an extraordinary furious letter to the paper in response.

While steadfastly refusing to address the queries put to him, Mr Swire embarked on a furious tirade against those of us he sees as intruding into personal issues.

Tax avoidance by big business has been a hobby horse of mine since I campaigned in the general election last year.

I find it shocking that there is one rule for super wealthy oligarchs and multi-nationals – which have the potential to make massive contributions to public services, and another for the rest of us. Last year, despite its monumental profits, Facebook paid just £4,000 corporation tax in this country!

Of course, such financial contributions to the treasury are especially vital at a time of austerity when public sector budgets are subjected to crippling and swingeing cuts.

Those with the least are always hit the hardest when this happens, as they rely more on public services, such as benefits, buses and care, than the wealthy, who can afford cars, private healthcare and have access to plenty of cash.

I organised a demonstration against aggressive tax avoidance outside the Sidmouth Conservative club, in February, where Mr Swire often holds his surgeries.

I also lodged a motion (which the Devon County Council Conservative leadership hopes they have kicked into the long grass) aimed at clamping down on tax avoidance by county council contractors.

The final debate on this will be on May 12 at full council.

Mr Swire dislikes that the prime minister and chancellor have published their tax returns, describing the move as a “difficult precedent.”

But Mr Swire, didn’t the prime minister publicly pillory Jimmy Carr for his tax avoidance activities?

And doesn’t Mr Osborne say how keen he is to get big business such as Facebook and Google to pay tax more equivalent to their income generated in the UK?

Mr Swire suggests that if MPs are to be asked about their tax affairs people in public life should also be scrutinised, including newspaper editors, BBC journalists and councillors.

This is perhaps an issue for discussion, however, as I see it there are two big distinctions between MPs and newspaper editors or BBC journalists. A journalist’s job is to report the news. But an MP’s job is to make decisions, pass laws and act for their constituents. They are in a position of trust and are paid very well for that position… with money from the British taxpayer.

The taxpayers who pay the East Devon MP’s generous salary deserve a bit of openness about his tax affairs, now the public interest has understandably rocketed in the ongoing scandal that is tax avoidance.”

No doubt we haven’t heard the last of this story.
http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/letter-Claire-Wright-right-MPs-reveal-tax-returns/story-29143814-detail/story.html

Germany asks Belgium to turn off two nuclear reactors due to safety concerns

RLIN/BRUSSELS, April 20 (Reuters) – Germany has asked Belgium to take two nuclear reactors temporarily off the grid while questions about their safety are cleared up, an unusual diplomatic move that underscores German concerns about the plants.

Production at Belgium’s Tihange 1 nuclear reactor was halted for about 10 days in December because of a fire. Staffing has also been reduced to minimise the risk of unauthorised personnel gaining access to the plants after the November attacks on Paris and the March attacks on Brussels.
Environment Minister Barbara Hendricks said on Wednesday that the decision to request another shut down of the Tihange 2 and Doel 3 reactors came after Germany’s independent Reactor Safety Commission advised that it could not confirm the reactors would be safe in the event of a fault.

Deputy Environment Minister Jochen Flasbarth telephoned the Belgian Interior Minister on Hendrick’s behalf on Tuesday to request a shutdown pending further safety investigations. Officials did not specify a timeframe.
The core tanks at the 33-year-old Doel 3 and Tihange 2 reactors were built by Dutch company Rotterdamsche Droogdok Maatschappij, which has also built reactors in other countries.

The two reactors, both with about a gigawatt of capacity, were closed in 2012 and again in 2014 after a brief restart, after inspections unveiled tiny cracks in their core tanks.

But the Belgian regulator authorised a restart in November 2015 after finding that the cracks were hydrogen flakes trapped in the walls of the reactor tank and had no unacceptable impact on the plant’s safety.
“I consider it right that the plants are temporarily taken offline at least until further investigations have been completed. I have asked the Belgian government to take this step,” Hendricks said in a statement.

She added the move would send a strong signal to reassure Germany and show that Belgium is taking the concerns of its neighbours seriously.
Belgian nuclear regulator FANC expressed surprise at the German minister’s remarks, saying in a statement that it had explained the issue with the reactors at a meeting of international experts.

“The nuclear reactors at Doel 3 and Tihange 2 fulfil the highest security standards,” the agency added.

Spurred by the disaster at Japan’s Fukushima plant in 2011, Germany pledged to abandon nuclear power generation completely by 2022 in favour of other power sources.

Hendricks’ comments are the highest profile criticism of the Belgian nuclear reactors so far in Germany, with the region around Aachen and the state of North Rhine-Westphalia having previously voiced concern.

Last week, the state of North Rhine-Westphalia said it would join a lawsuit brought by the Aachen city region against the Tihange 2 reactor, which is roughly 65 kilometres (about 40 miles) away from the west German city.
Germany has long been nervous about the safety of the reactors and a working group of officials met earlier this month to discuss the issue. Flasbarth told reporters talks with Belgian authorities had been constructive.
He added the decision to make the request had not been taken lightly and that Germany would give the Belgian government time to respond.”

(Reporting by Caroline Copley; Editing by Ruth Pitchford)

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/reuters/article-3549886/Germany-asks-Belgium-switch-nuclear-reactors.html

Devolution – not all it is cracked up to be

There are significant accountability implications arising from ‘devolution deals’ which central government and local areas will need to develop and clarify, the National Audit Office has said.

In a report, English devolution deals, the spending watchdog said these implications included “the details of how and when powers will be transferred to mayors and how they will be balanced against national parliamentary accountability”.

The NAO noted that the ten deals agreed so far involved increasingly complex administrative and governance configurations.

It stressed that, as devolution deals were new and experimental, “good management and accountability both depend on appropriate and proportionate measures to understand their impact”.

The watchdog said that to improve the chances of success, and provide local areas and the public with greater clarity over the progression of devolution deals, central government should clarify the core purposes of the arrangements as well as who will be responsible and accountable for devolved services and functions.

Central government should also ensure it identifies and takes account of risks to devolution deals that arise from ongoing challenges to the financial sustainability of local public services, the NAO added.
HM Treasury and the Cities and Local Growth Unit are responsible for managing the negotiation, agreement and implementation of devolution deals on behalf of central government as a whole.

Amyas Morse, head of the National Audit Office, said: “Despite several iterations of deals, the Government’s approach to English devolution still has an air of charting undiscovered territory. It is in explorer mode, drawing the map as it goes along.

“Some of the opportunities and obstacles are becoming clearer, but we still do not have a clear view of the landscape or, crucially, an idea of the destination.”

Morse added: “Devolution deals provide important opportunities to reform public services. As with any experiment, some elements will work better than others. As we have said before, it is in the interests of both local areas and the government to know which programmes have the biggest impact for the money invested. Localism is not a reason for failure to learn from experiences or to spread best practice.”

Responding to the NAO report, a Local Government Association spokesman said: “Councils are working hard on implementing agreed deals and are working with government to finalise those deals which are still to be signed.

“It is imperative that the momentum is maintained to secure deals, especially in non-metropolitan areas whose economic potential is just as significant as that of big cities.”

“In terms of accountability, devolution has the potential to improve the democratic process by allowing decisions to be made closer to local people to best meet their needs. But councils should be free to put in place the appropriate model of governance for their communities and not have a ‘one-size-fits-all’ model imposed on them where significant new responsibilities are devolved.”

The LGA spokesman added: “The report rightly recognises the possible complications arising from differing geographies for service delivery and councils, particularly for the recently announced sustainability and transformation plans. Councils and their partners will continue to take a pragmatic approach to designing and delivering services that best meet the needs of their communities.

“We support the study’s findings that devolution needs to be accompanied by fair and sustainable funding by Whitehall to manage risk and ensure devolved areas can run services successfully.

“This will help to ensure that the opportunities provided by devolution – delivering economic growth, building more homes, creating jobs and a skilled workforce, and joining up health and care services – will be actively embraced by both local and central government.”

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=26690%3Aspending-watchdog-warns-on-devolution-deals-and-accountability&catid=59&Itemid=27