Exmouth “regeneration”: ” You couldn’t make it up” – but EDDC just did!

“You couldn’t make it up” – but EDDC just did with Exmouth Q and A:

“Nando’s have “no plans” to open up a branch in Exmouth, despite being linked to the future seafront development in a council Q&A.

The popular Portuguese restaurant was listed by East Devon District Council, alongside La Tasca and Pizza Express, as being examples of restaurants that could open in the £18m Queen’s Drive redevelopment project.

But before East Devon piri-piri and chicken fans could get excited, the chain quickly shot down any further speculation.

They say their nearest branch for Exmouth diners will continue to be Exeter.

East Devon District Council has since defended its decision to include the names of three operators in connection with the project.

A spokesperson for the authority said: “It was clear in the responses to the Q and A that Pizza Express, La Tasca and Nando’s were given purely as examples of the type of restaurants that like to attach themselves to multiplex cinema developments.”

Adding: “We think it is helpful to give people some sense of the style of restaurant offer that might be available.”

La Tasca and Pizza Express are yet to comment on their own involvement.”

http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/Nando-s-Exmouth-despite-links-seafront/story-28723506-detail/story.html

How did Chardstock and Dunkeswell get introduced into the local plan at the last millisecond?

The timeline of how the decisions were taken make VERY, VERY interesting reading – in documents accompanying the Scrutiny Committee agenda for

18 February 2016, 6.00pm

here:

http://eastdevon.gov.uk/media/1531428/180215-scrutiny-agenda-combined.pdf

particularly page 13 onwards:

DUNKESWELL

“Councillor B Buxton asked for inclusion of Dunkeswell on the BUAB list, on grounds of size of settlements, 160 firms many on industrial site and felt that the village met most of the criteria. In response, the committee were informed there was no school- Cllr Buxton responded that a school was expected as consultation was underway with the County Council and a site had been designated.
Recommendation from DMC to add Dunkeswell to the list with build up area boundary.
What evidence supported that statement by Cllr Buxton?
Follow up by officers and Clerk of Dunkeswell confirmed that no plans by Devon County Council for a school. Clerk also checked if a ny plans for a free school, again no plans. When produced the sustainability assessment was undertaken (which determines which villages should retain BUABs) DCC confirmed no plans for a school.”
CHARDSTOCK
Council 26 March 2015
David Mortimer (public) spoke to as k to add Chardstock to list of sustainable villages on the Local Plan having build up boundary, in light of DMC recommendation to include Dunkeswell.   He stated that he agreed
with the DMC recommendation to add Dunkeswell;
transport as a measure of sustain ability is too simplistic. Why not add other villages with similar; in terms of Chardstock, stated that it had an undersubscribed new primary school with 66% of pupils coming from
outside the parish village school, and a number of other facilities and services available in the village.
Councillor Andrew Moulding proposed to add Chardstock; Including stating reasons of school of 150 pupils in place, community services and transport available at one end of location which could be reached by the community. The proposal was debated with councillors speaking both for and against inclusion; in response on request of the Chairman, the CX reminded the Council of the officer advice that the village did not meet the criteria but there were clearly opposing views an d the proposal should be voted on.
Carried on vote to include Chardstock in the BUAB list. DMC recommendations agreed, therefore also including Dunkeswell.
Email from Cllr Giles to Chief Executive
27 March 2015
“I am writing to express my great unease about the way a decision was made about Chardstock at yesterday`s Extra Ordinary meeting of EDDC to make submissions to the Local Plan Inspector. I was unaware, and I suspect the vast majority of councillors were unaware, that a decision about the status of Chardstock was to be made at the meeting. Certainly there was no specific documentation supplied for the meeting to suggest this.
At the beginning of the meeting, under the public speaking arrangements, a Mr David Mortimer spoke in support of Chardstock being a sustainable community and seeking its designation to be changed. As I recall Mr Mortimer gave no details of himself, of where he lived, of whether he was a landowner in Chardstock, or whether he was acting for a landowner in Chardstock. Of course if he fitted into either of the last two categories that  ould not have stopped him speaking – but it would have been relevant to know.
There was no further mention of Chardstock until much later in the meeting when the Council Deputy Leader, Council lor Andrew Moulding (who is not the ward member) spoke in favour of Chardstock`s status being changed because it is a sustainable location. As I recall (but I apologise if I am wrong), Councillor Moulding said that Mr Mortimer was speaking on behalf of Chardstock Parish Council. There seemed to be considerable doubt about whether Mr Mortimer was actually speaking on behalf of Chardstock Parish Council. My recollection is that he did not say he was.
My particular concerns are that a decision was taken without any  information to justify it, in spite of the Inspector making very clear that he wanted an evidence-based Local Plan submission from EDDC.
Specific questions that I would like answered please are:
What is the Chardstock Parish Council view on the redesignation of Chardstock, as far as we are aware?
Did Chardstock Parish Council make a recent submission to EDDC relevant to the Extra Ordinary meeting of yesterday?
When and what was the nature of the most recent Chardstock PC submission to EDDC about its situation in the EDLP?
What evidence does EDDC have of consultation exercises undertaken within the Parish of Chardstock about the EDLP? If EDDC has such evidence, what does it show of the view of Chardstock residents?
What discussions specifically about Chardstock took place at or following the EDDC LDF/LP Panel hearings?
I look forward to early answers to the above questions.
Meanwhile I am greatly concerned that a fundamental change of policy was agreed at a meeting yesterday without any supporting documentation, purely on the basis of arguments made at the meeting by just two people–one a councillor and the other a member of the public, on a matter that (unlike the Sidford 5ha of employment land) had not previously been discussed, and on which the view of the Parish Council was uncertain.”
 
1 April 2015
Approved 15/0217/FUL in YARTY ward (Chardstock) for five dwellings against officer advice on unsustainable location.
17 June 2015
Representation from one Chardstock Parish Councillor that decision taken by Council was not evidence based.
25 June 2015
Representations from two Chardstock Parish Councillors that the decision taken by Council to include Chardstock was not evidence based.
4 July 2015
Application 15/1007
South View, Chardstock decision was refused:
“Whilst in other respects the application is considered to be acceptable and despite the site’s location within the village and the builtup area boundary, defined under the Adopted East Devon Local Plan, this is not considered to be a sustainable site to accommodate new development. Chardstock has only a limited range of services and access to a wider range of services and employment opportunities, necessary for day to day living, is only available via private transport due to the lack of public transport service to the village.   Despite the site being included with the draft New Local Plan Strategy 27 as a sustainable village, this policy can only be afforded limited weight as the Strategy has been out to public consultation and has not been endorsed by the Local Plan Inspector and as such the application falls to be considered on the basis of its sustainability.  As such, the limited social and economic benefits that would arise from the delivery of a single dwelling are considered to be outweighed by the environmental impact of the development resulting from its unsustainable location served by a limited range of services and lack of public transport.
The application is therefore recommended for refusal on this basis.
January 2016:
Inspector report on Local PlanParagraph 31–
“Chardstock and Dunkeswell have limited facilities and do not benefit from access to public transport. Their addition to Strategy 27 is not supported by the Council’s Small Towns and Villages Development
Suitability Assessment 2014 and I have removed them from Strategy 27”.
”.

“£1 billion pound investment” in south-west railways by Great Western allows very little for Devon and Cornwall but does include second-hand railway carriages from London!

… Mr Hopwood admitted to the WMN afterwards that only a fraction of the money would make it to the far South West [from £1 billion promised much of which gets spent in the Home Counties and Wales]

 About £350 million will be spent on new Hitachi trains, and other investments include improvements to signals in Cornwall, and £10 million on the sleeper service.

Mr Hopwood said the Westcountry would get “cascaded and refurbished” rolling stock from the Thames Valley when trains there are upgraded.”

“Cascaded and refurbished rolling stock…!

Does that mean we go to “Cascade Shops” and not Charity Shops!

EDDC – duplicitous or negligent about heritage assets?

This is about Ottery St Mary, but it could be your town or village.  And should this not be an Asset Management Forum issue?

“Ottery’s conservation area is ‘at risk’ – but civic leaders say they have been kept in the dark about its deteriorated state until now.

District chiefs admitted last week that a lack of communication needs to be addressed after it emerged many of the town’s heritage assets are in ‘very bad’ condition, yet no information had been reported to representatives who advise on planning decisions.

A conservation area is categorised as a place particularly valued by the community because of its historic character and associations.  An annual survey conducted by East Devon District Council (EDDC) highlighted a number of concerns and officially identified the fragile state of Ottery’s conservation area.  Results are recorded on Historic England’s ‘at risk’ register, but details were only revealed to town councillors at a meeting last week.

Councillor Jo Talbot highlighted the issue following a talk she attended to gather information for the creation of the Neighbourhood Plan, which will shape the future of the parish.  She said: “A representative from Historic England told us that Ottery’s conservation area is in the ‘at risk’ category. EDDC knew about this, but it did not follow through to us.  “We should have had guidance on what to say when shops come up in the conservation area. We need to look at restoring our conservation area.”

Cllr Roger Giles condemned the lack of information that he said should have been taken into account in all planning recommendations.

In response, an EDDC spokeswoman said: “Like all local authorities, we are required to carry out an annual survey of our conservation areas by Historic England. Following the survey work and during discussions with Historic England, concerns were raised about Ottery town centre – particularly regarding shop fronts, signage and the use of uPVC windows.  “These concerns have led to it being identified as ‘at risk’, along with over 500 other conservation areas nationally.”

In response to the authority’s failure to pass on the information, the spokeswoman said: “We do not have any specific processes for reporting when heritage assets are at risk. This is something that needs to be looked at, together with how we can engage more with our communities to prevent heritage assets being put at risk and how we can address this when it happens.”  She added advice is available to town councillors with regards to planning matters on request.

The full assessment reveals that Ottery’s conservation area is in a ‘very bad’ condition, but its vulnerability is classed as ‘medium’, with the trend towards improving.

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/ottery_st_mary_s_heritage_assets_at_risk_1_4416364

Thanks, Mr Swire – not! Devon 143rd out of 152 authorities for funding spend per person on health

Hugo Swire has told us on countless occasions that he can’t speak for us in Parliament because he is a Minister. But he reassures us that he can and does talk about us in private to other Ministers (which Owl finds worse than talking about us in public when at least we could know what he is saying about us.

However, it seems that whatever he says (if he says anything at all as he is usually jetting around the world as bagman for the Foreign Minister) it has fallen on deaf ears:

“A massive blow has been dealt to Devon’s health care after being told it will receive less funding.

For the next financial year in 2016/17, Devon County Council will receive almost £28m – £800,000 lower than anticipated, increasing fears over the a service that has already been recognised as being under significant financial pressures and demands.

It amounts to an allocation of £38 per person in Devon, compared to a national average of £69. In comparison, the city of London receives £200, and Middlesborough gets £126. …

…In the league table of public health grants per region, Devon is now ranked 143 out of 152 local authorities.

If Devon did receive the national average its public health funding would increase to over £51 – an extra £13 per person.

The public heath grant news arrived yesterday lunch time – the day before Devon County Council’s cabinet committee discussed the budget for the next financial year.

Speaking at today’s cabinet meeting, Andrea Davis, Devon County Council cabinet member for improving health and wellbeing, said: “That’s what I call shoving us right at the bottom. We are now fifth from the bottom in the league table. To say I’m unhappy is an understatement and we don’t have any reserves.”

http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/Funding-blow-Devon-s-health-sees-ranked-near/story-28722938-detail/story.html

Devolution questions – does our LEP really exist? Or is it a figment of crazed imaginations?

Who chose the members of our Local Enterprise Partnership? It seems to just have arrived one day fully-formed.

Did they put themselves forward?
Were they approached?
How many people were considered?
Who decided how many people would be chosen?
How many applied/were approached?
Who decided which ones to appoint?
What were the criteria used?
Are they being paid?
If so, how much?
Are they on contracts?
If so, for how long?
What about conflicts of interest?

Owl awaiting a response from our LEP with great interest

P.S Anyone ever RECEIVED a letter, with letterheading and contact details from our LEP? Or a personal email from someone at the LEP? Owl’s email address is at the top of this blog.

Does it exist or is it a figure of our collective nightmares!

Do the Emperors have clothes?

What a South Hams district councillor thinks of devolution

“The dreadful “Devolution” proposals from the Heart Of The South West Local Enterprise Partnership were endorsed by South Hams District Council today – but not before Opposition Group of councillors had put up a big fight. Here is what one of them said:

“The Government has taken away the funds that local authorities were once spending to meet the needs of local people – for affordable homes, care services, repairing local roads etc. It now offers to give back £195.5 million – but only if we endorse a package of megaprojects in which we have had no say.

This is coercion, not ‘devolution’. The decisions about how this council spent its money were once democratically decided; the proposals in this Devolution Prospectus were not. It is not the economic recovery plan that residents would have created themselves if they had been given the opportunity.

ROADS. The Government has taken away the money that County Councils once used to maintain local and rural roads – and then gives the LEP this money for major road projects that are not our top priority.

ENERGY. Government cuts to Feed In Tariffs have wiped out hundreds of community-led renewable energy projects across the South West but now they propose to pump £20,000,000,000 – Twenty Billion Pounds – into subsidising the Hinkley C Nuclear Power Station over the next three decades – a 50% subsidy, that has no mandate from local people, for a project that may only start in 2025 and maybe never.

HOUSING. There are proposals to build 179,000 new houses across Devon and Cornwall – but the plan ignores the priorities of all the Councils across the South West that want affordable housing for local people – not unregulated market housing. Whilst “Housing” is mentioned repeatedly, three key words are totally missing from this document – “affordable”, “social” and “rented”. Those are the kinds of houses we most urgently need, not commercial housing.

This proposal is an attack on Democracy; its priorities are not the priorities of local people; it puts the needs of big business before the needs of local people and it is helping to bail out businesses, such as Hinkley C, that are nowhere near being financially viable without massive subsidy.”

Private Eye Rotten Boroughs Awards 2015

And what a magnificent bunch they are … so many troughs, so many pigs … so many snouts. Here are the awards in all their glory:

FROM the council in Waltham Forest that for two years hired out a room for “ladies tea afternoons” to what turned out to be a group of burqa-clad Isis supporters, to the council employees in Wigan who were caught sleeping on the job by a TV crew making a documentary about how dynamic they were, here are the gongs awarded by Lord Gnome for the most egregious municipal mishaps – and worse – in 2015…

WEIGHTWATCHER OF THE YEAR:
Michael Jones, Tory leader of Cheshire East council, revealed last month that he had lost an impressive six-and-a-half stone since engaging the services of local physiotherapist Amanda Morris, whom he described as “awesome”. Alas Cllr Jones also announced that he will be stepping down next month. This is a consequence of Eye 1403’s revelation that council contracts for fitness classes, worth £156,000, had gone Ms Morris’s way without a normal tendering process.

PARTY UNITY AWARD:
to Ukip, which triumphantly took control of its first council, Thanet, in May, then quickly lost it as the ’kippers fell out among themselves in a series of bitter personal squabbles.

GONE BUT NOT FORGOTTEN:
former Tower Hamlets mayor Lutfur Rahman, who was barred from office for five years after being found guilty by an electoral court in April of “corrupt and illegal practices”, including vote-rigging and bribery. As the winner of multiple Rotten Boroughs awards over the years, Lutfur will be missed. Somehow it feels that we have not heard the last of him.

WITCHFINDER OF THE YEAR:
When Larne council in Northern Ireland voted to put up a memorial to eight local women who were persecuted and jailed for “witchcraft” in 1711, Alderman Jack McKee of the Traditional Unionist Voice party voted against because he “couldn’t be sure” they were wrongly convicted and was worried the plaque would become a “shrine to paganism”.

SERVICES TO DEMOCRACY:
Disgraced former Guildford Tory councillor Monika Juneja, who narrowly escaped going to prison in June after being found guilty on charges of forgery, deception and falsely claiming to be a barrister, kept up the good work by raising a petition in favour of an elected mayoral system for the town. Thousands of signatures were obtained by Surrey university students, who were paid £1 per signature by Juneja. Monika’s “very close friend”, council leader Stephen Mansbridge, was widely believed to have mayoral ambitions but denied having any involvement in the petition. In October local website the Guildford Dragon revealed that he had, in fact, secretly lobbied the students’ union to back the idea. Mansbridge resigned shortly afterwards.

MONEY AND MOUTH AWARD:
Independent Allerdale councillor Jim Lister’s election leaflets campaigned against “unnecessary windfarms blighting our countryside” – a vexed issue in a borough with more of the useless eyesores than the rest of Cumbria put together. He forgot to mention that six months earlier he’d applied for and won permission for a 113ft turbine on his own farm.

UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES AWARD:
The deputy leader of South Lanarkshire council, Jackie Burns, was fined for peeing in public outside a nightclub at 2am. He had no choice – there are no public toilets in the Labour council’s area because it has closed them all to save money.

COMBATING EXTREMISM:
Until an undercover Channel 4 reporter discovered the truth, for two years Labour Waltham Forest council hired out a room for “ladies tea afternoons” to a group of burqa-clad women… who turned out to be an Isis supporters’ group.

GREENWASH AWARD:
Bristol’s mayor George Fergusoncelebrated more than 200 electric car charging points having opened in the area since 2012, at a total cost of more than £1m. The Bristol Post discovered that each one was used on average fewer than eight times a year.

COMEBACK KID:
Sixteen years after resigning as a Lancashire county councillor and West Lancashire district councillor when exposed by this column (Eye 987) for deliberately falsifying a local MP’s election expenses, Frank McKenna was re-elected to the latter council in May. In these difficult times the Labour party needs every honest man it can get.

DEARLY DEPARTED AWARD:
Runner-up: Coventry city council’s Labour leadership got out the onions after the sudden death of the council’s deputy leader, solicitor Phil Townshend, saying he had been held in “deep affection… locally, nationally and internationally” and spent more than £8,000 on funeral costs and a reception afterwards… while ignoring the fact that Townshend was the subject of a police fraud investigation into how he had come to acquire the home of an elderly vulnerable woman who was one of his clients. Winner: Nuneaton and Bedworth council said it would be flying the borough flag at half-mast on the day of the funeral of former Labour mayor Bill Deacon as a mark of respect. The flag remained unlowered after someone remembered that dear Bill had been jailed in 1994 for child sex offences.

WHITEWASH AWARD:
to Norfolk county council (NCC) whose children’s services department was rated “inadequate” by Ofsted for the second time in three years. In February one of the department’s managers, Peter Barron, was sacked after the Eye exposed how he had manufactured evidence which led to a child being removed from a blameless foster carer. Despite further Eye stories about Barron’s unethical behaviour, he secured a job managing a private children’s home to which NCC remains happy to send looked-after children. In the wake of the Barron scandal the council’s £1,000-a-day interim children’s services boss Sheila Lock set up an “independent” review chaired by former Middlesbrough chief exec Ian Parker into the council’s treatment of foster carers. Nine months on it is still to report, but has excluded the county’s main body representing foster carers and, according to emails between Lock and Parker seen by the Eye, was at pains to only offer “a small window” for complaints.

FINANCIAL PROBITY AWARD:
Ripon councillor Andrew Williams, who had previously been found guilty of stealing hundreds of pounds raised by the council from the sale of ice-creams during the Queen’s diamond jubilee in 2012, was made chair of… the finance committee.

WORKPLACE SAFETY:
The London borough of Waltham Forestwas fined £66,000 with £16,000 costs for failing to protect staff and public from asbestos on its premises. The council had known about the deadly dust in its basement since 1984 but had done nothing about it until 2012, despite being ordered to undertake remedial work by the Heath and Safety Executive in 2002.

PR TRIUMPH OF THE YEAR:
Runner-up: After a Labour councillor in Stoke-on-Trent was caught using false names to praise his own council in text messages to local radio, Cheshire Eastcouncil’s Tory leader Michael Jonesboasted that on his mobile it was “all me”. It was then revealed that Jones’s clunky tweets were actually written by council press officers. Winner: Wigan council, whose attempt to get some free publicity by participating in a TV documentary about how brilliant and dynamic it was backfired badly when cameras caught council staff asleep on the job, nicking off early to play darts and moaning about their bosses.

BRASS-NECK AWARD:
to Liverpool mayor Joe Anderson, who spent nearly £90,000 of council-taxpayers’ money on legal bills fighting his dismissal from a £4,500-a-year part-time job as a school “learning mentor”. Despite having not actually carried out any duties since 2010, when he became council leader, later mayor, Anderson continued to be paid until 2012. When the school then, not unreasonably, decided to dispense with his non-existent services, Joe (salary £80,000+ p.a.) called in m’learned friends – and lost.

QUOTES OF THE YEAR
“Sometimes it’s difficult to tell the difference between the dead and the living when it comes to Berwick councillors.” – local resident after Berwick-upon-Tweed council held a minute’s silence for a “deceased” former mayor who turned out to be alive and well and living in New Zealand.

“He must be blind.” – Torbay mayor Gordon Oliver’s retort at Lib-Dem opponent Steve Darling’s apparent inability to appreciate the benefits of Tory rule in Torbay. Cllr Darling is blind.

“Just told the local Big Issue seller to fuck off back to Romania.” – Dover Tory councillor Bob Frost makes his contribution to the immigration debate via Twitter.

“Flashy freebies.” – Richmond council’s high-minded Tory leader, Lord True, refusing free Olympic tickets, 2012.
“Thank you very much.” – Lord True accepting free Rugby World Cup tickets, 2015.

“Once you’ve got in your car you might just as well go the extra mile.” – Cardiff Labour councillor Iona Gordon attempts to explain the environmental benefits of closing half the city’s recycling centres, thereby making people drive further to dump their waste.

http://www.private-eye.co.uk/issue-1409/rotten-boroughs

Shake-up for Devon-wide health services brought to you by the “Success Regime”

The first report on Devon health services since the county was put in special measures (re-branded as a “Success Regime” !) is published today and promises (threatens?) major changes, some of which “may” need public consultation at a later stage. Oh, and Owl likes the way the phrase “best performing” is used to mean “cheapest”!

The usual buzz words abound: transformation, best practice, latest thinking, latest technology …. One surprising finding is that community hospitals are under-used:

“Possible changes that could be considered to achieve the aims of the Success Regime programme range from looking at highly specialised services covering the whole of Devon and Cornwall, and possibly beyond; and further investigation into community hospital beds in Devon because the report says there is still a lot of space in community hospitals that is not being used.”

Is it that space is not being used or there are not enough members of staff available to use it? And which are the community hospitals that fall into this category?

What next? According to the (very long) press release:

“There have been 20 opportunities identified in the document. Out of those we will be looking at the options that might emerge, and how we engage with patients and the public.

“That will be by March or April, and those 20 opportunities will become four or five options to move into more diagnostic consultation.

“There will be some things we can just get on and do such as addressing agency staff as they are operational matters. Other options will require much more engagement and there will be some consultation with people in the summer months.”

In the meantime they have published some of their initial findings:

“The ‘Case for Change’ facts:

. Health and social care spending in Devon was £1.9bn in 2014/15.

. Local health and social care organisations are facing a financial shortfall in 2015/16 of £122m, rising to £442m in 2020/21 if nothing changes.

. People in Devon are living longer. More than one in five people are over the age of 65, rising to one in four by 2021.

In Devon, 3.1 per cent are over the age of 85, higher than the national English average of 2.3 per cent.

. Devon is generally affluent but there are health inequalities in deprived areas.

• There are 280,000 local people, including 13,000 children, living with one or more long-term condition such as asthma, cancer and mental illness.

. Around 150,000 people in Devon have a mental illness.

.There are 40,000 people with cancer.

• Around 95,000 people with a long-term condition also have a mental illness.

. Local health and social care services are likely to be £442m in debt by 2020/21 if nothing changes.

. There is predicted to be 37,000 more emergency admissions to local hospitals over the next five years, an increase of more than 30 per cent. Many of these admissions are preventable.

• An estimated £85m is being spent on areas where staff may be able to provide the same quality of service but more efficiently.

. Over £30mwas being spent on temporary staff in hospitals in 2014/15.

. Up to £25m could be saved on clinical supplies if hospitals work together to buy them.

. Up to £21m could be saved by matching spend on continuing care to best performing areas.

. A third of bed space in community hospitals is empty or under-used.

. Every day, more than 500 people are in local hospitals when they could be elsewhere. Most of them are old and many have dementia.

. Over half the people in Devon who are fit to leave the community hospital have been waiting to leave for at least four days. It costs £250 per day to care for someone in an acute hospital bed.

• There are difficulties recruiting and retaining staff at all levels. Almost a quarter of GPs in Devon intend to leave the NHS in the next five years.

http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/Unaffordable-unsustainable-services-lost-major/story-28715410-detail/story.html

EDDC ” public servant” should consider his position

Just in case anyone doesn’t realise who the “public servant” is – it is Mark Williams, CEO of East Devon District Council. And maybe here, we should see what his “union” [aptly called SOLACE – Society of Local Authority Chief Executives] says about the role and contrast this with what is reported later on:

“At its most simple, the role has four principle aspects:
 Managerial leadership of the organisation;

 Providing and securing advice to the Council on strategy and policy;

 Acting in an executive capacity by making decisions or ensuring a system is in place for other officers to make decisions, as authorised by the Council; and

 Delivering probity, value for money and continuous improvement.”

Click to access SOLACE_response_CO_Pay_Inquiry_140130.pdf

Nowhere does it mention insulting members of the public or whole TOWNS!

THE LETTER TO THE PRESS:

“The conduct and comments of EDDC’s most senior officer at last week’s Extra Ordinary Council Meeting, continue to cause shock waves in the press.
The letter copied below, from Save Our Sidmouth member, Robert Crick, appears in Pullman’s View from Sidmouth (9th February, 2016).

‘On behalf of the Save Our Sidmouth campaign our widely respected neighbour Richard Eley read a short statement during public questions before last Thursday’s District Council meeting. The statement expressed regret at the problems the Local Plan process had caused over the past few years, and reminded members that residents regarded the proposal to build an industrial estate on the Sidford Flood Plain as an act of folly.

Mr Eley then stated that since this process has now come to an end, Save Our Sidmouth recommends a fresh start to rebuild trust between the authority and the town of Sidmouth.

After putting their questions, members of the public then witnessed a remarkable event.

A non-elected public servant appropriated elected councillors’ speaking privileges by rounding on the people of Sidmouth. He angrily blamed us for having delayed the process by daring to question the Council’s original proposals. He then denounced Mr Eley personally, claiming he had called Inspector Thickett “an idiot”.

Challenged by the meeting, he refused to acknowledge that he had misrepresented Mr Eley’s words. When forced to admit his error, he absolutely refused to apologise.

Councillor Stuart Hughes, Chair of the Council, finally gave a dignified apology, which allowed the elected members to proceed and adopt the Local Plan.

It was evident to all that the paid official has a deep-rooted and obsessive personal animosity to the town and people of the Sid valley, which must surely disqualify him from a continuing role as a servant of East Devon. Perhaps it is time for him to consider his position.‘

Public servant at centre of ‘remarkable event’ should ‘consider his position’

Electoral Reform Society compiling interactive map of “rotten boroughs” – stick YOUR pin in it!

Rotten Boroughs – Tell us your story

One Party States. Uncontested seats. There’s something very wrong with local government in England and Wales.

Campaign background

Good local government depends on decent local democracy. But many of us are now living in Rotten Boroughs – unaccountable and unresponsive, where our votes don’t make a difference.

It doesn’t have to be this way.

You can help us win the argument for fair votes in England and Wales. Have you been let down by local democracy? Do you live in a Rotten Borough?

http://action.electoral-reform.org.uk/ea-action/action?ea.client.id=1754&ea.campaign.id=21160

Is the Local Government Ombudsman fit-for-purpose?

“LGO Watch is far from the work of a few disgruntled complainants, even the LGO’s own customer satisfaction survey revealed that a whopping 73% of complainants were dissatisfied by the outcome of their individual cases. Since its founding in 2003, the Watch has amassed a legion of supporters nationwide, and a similar Scottish watch has since been set up to target the corruption in local government north of the border.

With less than 2% of submitted complaints declared by the LGO as maladministration, there is a certain weight to the claims that the tax-funded service is not wholly committed to securing justice for the public.

One reason the LGO Watch provides to explain allegations of pro-council bias within the office is the alarming fact that all three current LGOs were themselves previously chief executives of local authorities. In fact evidence shows that many of the LGO’s investigators previously worked in local government.

If you took a damning complaint about the local police force to an independent, publicly-funded investigation and adjudication group, would it be fair to have a former chief of that same organisation handle your case? …”

http://www.complaintexpert.co.uk/can-we-trust-ombudsman-with-our-complaints.html

Moirai expands further in Swindon – free skate park may be at risk

“Moirai Capital Investments are seeking approval for their 31 acre (12.5ha) leisure development which will be built adjacent to and around the newly refurbished Oasis Leisure Centre at North Star.

But although the outline plans mention a skate park – at the moment it is not clear whether it will be a free to use outdoor one to replace the current facility on the site or an indoor paid-for one.

A campaign to save the free outdoor facility has been launched by Diana Kirk of ATBSkate Warehouse at Hawksworth but she believes that their pleas are being ignored as it appears on the plans that it will be an indoor site. You can sign the petition, which so far has over 1,o00 signatures at:
http://www.bit.ly/oasis-skate …

… The plans submitted by Moirai include:

• Up to 50,000 square metres of mixed leisure including a cinema, 5,000 seat entertainment arena, ski centre and other leisure uses which could include a crazy golf centre, comedy club, laser tag and skate park;

• Up to 12,000sqm of restaurants and cafes

• Up to 12,000sqm retail space, with a minimum of 9,000sqm of sports retailing;

• Up to 9,000sqm for a hotel.

The vast £120 million leisure scheme will be one of the largest projects of its type in the UK.

Moirai chairman Martin Barber said: “This is a crucial step in the process of delivering this major development. Getting to this point has been complex, with consideration given to the best possible layout for the project, but also to address issues such as traffic management and the potential environmental impact of the development.”

Coun Garry Perkins, Swindon Cabinet Member for Economy, Regeneration & Skills said: “The application represents another step in this exciting project. I am satisfied that now Moirai have put together a proposal that matches the council’s ambitions; I look forward to hearing more as they get closer to turning these plans into a reality .

“These are only the outline plans and until we see the detailed ones it is difficult to say what form the skate park will take, but at least it is part of the plans at the moment.”

It is believed that many visitors to the facility will arrive by train, as Swindon’s station is only a short distance away. Forward Swindon has completed a feasibility study for a new pedestrian crossing over the mainline, adjacent to the station, connecting the north and south parts of the town centre. Seeking funding for the crossing is the next stage.

Chris Hitchings, director of development at Forward Swindon, said: “Swindon is well connected to a huge, affluent catchment. The arena and ski centre, for example, will provide Swindon with high profile destinations to compete with the likes of Cardiff, Bristol and Milton Keynes.”

Future of free skate park at Oasis in doubt. World’s skateboard legend Tony Hawk signs Swindon campaign petition

How a contract between Swindon Borough Council and Moirai Capital Investments changed over time

An article about how a contract between Swindon Borough Council and Moirai Capital Investments for the development of the Oasis leisure facility changed over time

From a blog written in 2014:

“Given the importance of the Oasis example to the council’s plans for the future of the leisure centres, I think we should try to find out what is actually going on there. Here are some facts:

• The agreement between SBC and Moirai was signed in March 2012. In January 2013, the lease was varied at the request of Moirai. The revised terms included the following:

• Moirai’s obligation to provide a minimum area of development on the Oasis site was lifted.

• SBC gave up its option to purchase back the Oasis if no development takes place.

• Should recovery of debt be required as a result of loan default, the bank would be able to sell the lease into the open market.

• In January 2011 the Council invited expressions of interest to build a new leisure centre based on the former Clares site. The plan originally submitted by Moirai showed a ski centre, 7,500 seat arena and hotel on the Clares site.

However, in March 2013, Moirai presented a revised plan for the site, moving the arena (reduced to 6,500 seats) to the south side of the Oasis and apparently leaving half the Clares site vacant.

• Moirai said an application for outline planning application would be submitted in June 2013 (it had previously been expected in March that year).

• At the beginning of May 2014, the application had still not appeared on the council’s planning pages. An application for outline planning permission is now expected later in 2014.

• Oasis Operations Ltd, a management company set up by Moirai, was declared insolvent in 2013 (The London Gazette). The directors, who had resigned earlier in the year, are currently named by online data company Companycheck as directors of other Moirai companies.

• According to Companycheck, at the beginning of May 2014 two of the Moirai companies, Oasis Waterpark Ltd and Moirai Capital Investments (Swindon) Ltd, had recommended credit limits of £0.00. Companycheck could not assign them a risk score as it was too long since they filed audited accounts.

On 8 May 2014 Oasis Waterpark Ltd. had filed accounts and the credit limit has been raised to £25,000 with a credit score of 40 out of 100.

According to the lease variation referred to above, Oasis Waterpark Ltd is the company with the lease on the Oasis.

the time the agreement was signed in March 2012, Mr Martin Barber was described as the Chairman of Moirai. Mr Barber’s directorship of Moirai Capital Investments Ltd ended on 17 February 2014. (CompanyCheck)

• Mr Barber said in March 2012: “We are ready to press forward enthusiastically with the first phase, the refurbishment of the Oasis Leisure Centre. . . We have already plans in hand for the replacement of the Dome”.

…

I don’t know anything about finance, and I do not know what is going on at the Oasis. Clearly these little gobbets of information do not present anything like the whole picture, and they may well be misleading.

However, I question whether, as early as March 2013, when the Council report included the option of “an Oasis type deal”, the council should not have been keeping a closer eye on developments at the Oasis.

I question whether Swindon people should feel confident that the Oasis provides an encouraging model for the future of their leisure centres and golf courses.

In the light of the lease variation agreed in January 2013, I question whether Swindon people can have any confidence that the terms of a lease agreed with a private sector operator to take over the leisure centres and golf courses will not be altered in future at the request of the leaseholder.

And I question whether the Oasis model suggests that Swindon Borough Council is professionally equipped to make a deal with private sector operators over the future of the leisure centres and golf courses which will be to the advantage of the town.”

The Oasis, Swindon Leisure Centres & the Golf Courses


We also note that several other Moirai companies have appeared in the London Gazette notices of being struck off. Sometimes this is because compulsory information required of companies has not been filed within proper time limits, sometimes it isn’t.

It is usually considered preferable for a company’s reputation and the reputation of its directors to (a) file accounts on time and/or (b) voluntarily wind up a company rather than have it struck off.

This year’s Tory Black and White Ball: a “glittering” guest list

Remember that, at the same time, the government is attempting to cut Labour Party donations and the money provided to smaller parties and independent parties in the UK.

“Standard” tables at the back of the room with a junior minister or MP were£5,000 each, “Premium” tables nearer to the PMs table with a senior minister £10,000, “Premium” table with a top Cabinet Minister or Boris Johnson AND a ” brush” with the PM £15,000.

Guests at the dinner and auction included

… “Access Industries — owned by Britain’s richest man, £13.17billion
oligarch Leonard Blavatnik — secured a prime spot as ministers including Jeremy Hunt and Michael Gove worked the room. Blavatnik has been criticised for his links to Russian president Vladimir Putin.

Jewellery tycoon Ranbir Singh Suri was also understood to have attended. He became embroiled in a “cash for peerages row” after he was made a Lord in 2014. Other guests included:

DEPARTMENT store owner Christopher Fenwick and Indian entrepreneur Ranjit Baxi, both caught up in a separate “cash for access” scandal after paying £50,000 to dine with the PM in 2014.

REAL-ESTATE brothers Eddie and Sol Zakay, worth £2.2billion through their Topland Group investment firm, who settled out of court with the Ministry of Justice in 2012 after allegedly extracting inflated rents from the Government.

SECRETIVE private members club United and Cecil, which has handed more than £500,000 to the party while taking advantage of a loophole in electoral laws which means its supporters can remain anonymous.”

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/6921115/Inside-the-Prime-Minister-secretive-Black-and-White-fundraiser-party.html

MP who wants to drop Human Rights Act uses it as a reason to protect MPs who are arrested!

“TOP eurosceptic minister Chris Grayling was today branded a “hypocrite” for backing new rules that block arrested MPs’ names being published.

MPs say the change is needed because revealing their identities breaches their “right to privacy” under the European Convention of Human Rights.

Yet Mr Grayling, an outspoken critic of the Human Rights Act who has said it should be scrapped, will be the cabinet minister to propose the change to the Commons today.

Labour MP John Mann said: “What a hypocrite. He only wants the Human Rights Act to apply to himself, not to the rest of the country.”

Labour’s Mr Mann also warned it could mean MPs fighting an election while voters are unaware they have been arrested.”

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/electorate-has-a-right-to-know-the-names-of-mps-who-have-been-arrested-a3176931.html

“The Budleigh Boys” part 3

The enthusiasm of the Budleigh Boys to dismiss the importance of the AONB and give greater weight to the economics of Pooh Cottage was not shared by Budleigh Salterton Town Council of which all three district councillors are members. The Town Council had recommended refusal.

At their January meeting the Town’s mayor expressed his surprise that the application was approved. But he was told it was alright as Councillor Dent felt the Highways Report was wrong and more traffic movements would not be created. This was endorsed by Councillor Tom Wright who thinks the result is a good solution.

This is a worrying trend by Budleigh Salterton District Councillors who know better than the planners and statutory bodies and also their Town Council.

An application to demolish a house which makes a “positive contribution to the conservation area” (Historic England) is awaiting decision. It was recommended for refusal by the Town Council.

The EDDC Conservation Officer writes that “Advice given at the pre-application stage concluded that the principle of demolition would be unacceptable on account of the contribution that the existing house makes to the character and appearance of the conservation area.” He concludes that “the proposed demolition should be considered unacceptable and the application refused.” The Environment Agency also has reservations due to the history of flooding in the area.

So what does a Budleigh Boy write?

“I am pleased to see the design of the new build is very similar to the existing and the increase in foot print, in my view, is not over development. I consider the plans to be acceptable and will provide 9 small dwellings, convenient to the town “

Word also has it that the two other boys feel the same.

RIP AONB, RIP special character of Budleigh? “Small dwellings” at any price?

MPs pay rises for second time in less than a year

MPs will see their salaries rise by almost £1,000 after the parliamentary pay watchdog signed off another increase. …

… The £952 rise comes just months after the body pushed through a controversial 10 per cent salary increase despite opposition from some MPs and trade unions. …

… It will take the basic wage for all 650 MPs to £74,962 a year, with ministers earning up to another £68,000 on top of that.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/12149835/MPs-pay-to-rise-by-another-1000-just-months-after-10-per-cent-salary-hike-signed-off.html

Government committee criticises housing association “right to buy”

… “the Communities and Local Government committee says the funding model it is using, which will force councils to compensate housing associations with the money raised from council house sales, is “extremely questionable” and is effectively a “levy” on councils.

It says the scheme should be funded by central government and questions how ministers are going to meet their target of replacing every property sold off with a new one. …

… Committee chairman Clive Betts said: “The fundamental success of this policy depends not just on whether more tenants come to own their home but on whether more homes are built.

“The government needs to set out in more detail how it will meet its target of at least one-for-one replacement of the sold homes, particularly given issues such as the availability of land, the capacity of the building industry and the uncertainty of income from council home sales.”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-35534463