Does he mean arable land or development land for houses? Time will tell:
Author Archives: transparencyforeastdevon
Updates on national planning regulations
There have been some disturbing tweaks, but there is news of some funding for community building projects, and a petition is in progress. Details in this extract from an e-mail from a group belonging to Community Voice on Planning (CoVoP) , of which EDA is also a member (see LINKS).
‘…the Government has now decided to remove the zero carbon targets for housing projects below 50 houses. Although the intent is to make things easier for small building companies, there is nothing to prevent larger building companies putting in applications in tranches to benefit from the legislation.
The Government has also amended its regulations to allow developers to renege on requirements for affordable housing on the grounds of financial viability. We are concerned that this will mean no affordable housing. The link to the relevant article is contained below:
http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2014/05/developers-able-demolish-affordable-housing-provision
On the 4th June 2014 three funding programmes, worth around £3 million, to support the development of new Community Land Trusts (CLTs) was launched in a House of Commons reception, see the link below:
http://www.insidehousing.co.uk/development/boost-for-community-building-projects-across-england-and-wales/7004001.article
A new petition for amendment to the NPPF can be accessed via http://epetitions.direct.gov.uk/petitions/59376. We urge you to sign this, please.
We would like to thank all those who responded to the review of the NPPF called for by the Committee for Communities and Local Government. Many of the concerns that we have been expressing for so long were echoed by organisations such as CPRE, the National Trust, Royal Society for Town and Country Planners and so on.
Regards
Jenny Unsworth
Vice Chairman
Protect Congleton – Civic Society http://protectcongleton.co.uk/
More scorched earth in Ottery
What happens to ‘section 106’ money?
The question is asked in a comment left on this blog post about the example of Stowford Community Centre, Sidmouth, which has so far struggled to get used. https://www.streetlife.com/conversation/1t0wtw75x4r0m/?uid=1vqhj9eoi27am&utm_source=daily
Beware trolls!
We have until now published all negative comments on this blog, even those that appear to come from different people with different names but are actually from the same source. We have done this to encourage debate.
However, the comments from one particular source are now becoming simply unpleasant personal attacks on individuals rather than reasoned arguments and we therefore reserve the right to block comments from multiple names from the same source that do not add to debate.
The technical term is trolling and it can be a criminal offence.
It’s election year.
Claire Wright’ s Parliament bid speech on You Tube
Claire has signed the EDA charter.
Parliamentary review of National Planning Policy Framework
Oral evidence began yesterday. The summary is HERE.
An interesting submission is from the District Councils Network HERE which gives a flavour of the difficulties local authorities are finding themselves in. The same applies to town and parish councils with the submission of the National Association of Local Councils HERE.
What is saddening is that DCN and NALC seem to have a much better grasp of the situation than EDDC.
The Queen’s Speech says that we can remove a dodgy MP? Er, no it doesn’t
You think that, from the Queen’s Speech, if an MP has been a Very Naughty Boy or a Very Naughty Girl and enough people (10% of the electorate) signs a petition to remove him or her within 8 weeks then that MP will lose his seat?
Think again: What the Queen didn’t say is MPs in Parliament then decide whether or not to agree with you ….. and if they don’t he or she stays.
More detail here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/06/04/sack-mp-voters-queens-speech_n_5447530.html
Shafted again everyone, shafted again.
McCarthy and Stone actively looking at Knowle?
As revealed by Cllr David Cox at last night’s Cabinet meeting, Savills has been selected as marketing agent for the current EDDC HQ site at Knowle. It is strongly rumoured that McCarthy and Stone have shown potential interest . Can anyone confirm this?
Hugo Swire has a plan …..
Please read this and let us know what you think the plan is:
Trouble rumbles on in East Budleigh
In a post on this blog on 21 Feb it was mentioned that at the public hearing into the local plan the EDDC Planning Officer read out paragraph 1 of the NPPF to the Planning Inspector. This is all about encouraging communities to get involved in the planning process. The Planning Officer then went on to say that communities were the best judge of where developments should go.
As part of complying with the Local plan, due process of consultation had been followed in East Budleigh with regard to choosing one of three sites all of which had been identified by EDDC in consultation with land owners as suitable. The people overwhelmingly preferred a brown field site at the village entry to the South by a majority of 68.5% (site C307). However in the published plan, EDDC introduced a series of spurious arguments to reject this site despite it being previously deemed suitable, and chose instead site C059 a field of agricultural Grade 1 land below Syon House; on the “wrong” side of the main road, with a site entry at a known accident black spot; and a site with known flooding issues. This site had been favoured by only 29.7% of the community.
We can now, perhaps, begin to understand why EDDC did this.
Last week Leigh Rix, Head of Property and Land at Clinton Devon Estates (CDE), attended the annual parish meeting at East Budleigh and attempted to explain why the field below Syon House was the site CDE would now be putting forward. CDE offered all three of the suitable sites in the original consultation so do we surmise that the decision to reject the brownfield site and ignore local opinion lies at their door rather than EDDC’s?
By all accounts Leigh Rix failed to present a convincing case. The meeting was curtailed before all had spoken and there is a rising sense of anger in the community that the consultation process has been a sham.
Why should CDE prefer to sacrifice grade 1 agricultural land in an AONB before a brownfield site? Why should EDDC planners go along with this bearing in mind what the NPPF says?
NPPF paragraph 111 says “planning policies and decisions should encourage the effective use of land by reusing land that has been previously developed (brownfield land).”
NPPF paragraph 112 says “Local planning authorities should take into account the economic and other benefits of the best and most versatile agricultural land. Where significant development of agricultural land is demonstrated to be necessary, local planning authorities should seek to use areas of poor quality land in preference to that of higher quality”
It is also instructive to look at CDE website to get a measure of their mission statement. It reads:
Doing our part for our part of the world. Clinton Devon Estates is a 21st century rural estate and property business. Responsible stewardship and sustainable development are at the heart of everything we do. Our mission is: “to secure the long term prosperity of the Estates and the people who live and work on them in ways which care for the countryside and engage with the wider community”
Ostensibly this application is for 15 houses but we fear that in order to satisfy the Inspector villages such as East Budleigh will have to take many more houses than this.
So does site C059 offer more opportunities for expansion?
Also, is CDE grabbing the opportunity that the current relaxed planning regime offers to gain planning permission for grade 1 agricultural land knowing it can always get a second bite at the cherry by offering a brownfield site at a later stage?
The Queen’s Speech: another ” get out of jail free” card for developers
Buried in the minutae of the Queen’s Speech to Parliament is yet another Golden Egg for developers.
The government intends to ensure that developers can immediately discharge upon application, certain types of planning conditions (presumably Section 106 contributions and maybe the affordable housing contribution) if a local authority has not notified the developer of their decision within a prescribed time period.
So, a local authority only has to be 24 hours late in reaching a (very quick) decision and every community benefit may be wiped out.
Some developments are so complex the targets of 8 or 13 weeks (depending on who you listen to) will be impossible. Simple applications may similarly now be made more complex by unscrupulous developers or local authorities wanting to push through developments but not wanting the developer to pay for community benefits or infrastructure.
Nice one Dave.
MP “buddying” with big businesses – why?
Senior coalition MPs are paired with big businesses. Our MP Hugo Swire is buddied with Proctor and Gamble – a US company.
In April 2011, P&G was fined 211.2m euros by the European Commission for establishing a price-fixing cartel in Europe along with Unilever, which was fined 104m euros, and Henkel (not fined).
Though the fine was set higher at first, it was discounted by 10% after P&G and Unilever admitted running the cartel.
So what exactly do WE get out of them being buddied?
“Thousands” of new jobs? Not quite. Today’s rant!
Anyone else get tired of reading puff jobs on supermarkets, fast food restaurants, etc saying “100 new jobs created” or “20 jobs” … when it turns out most of these jobs are either zero hours contracts or for 3 hours or 10 hours? Three or four of these “jobs” don’t even make one job. Maybe five or six or more are equal to one full-time post.
Then you go into said supermarket and see lines of self-serve tills or you see queues going outside the fast food shop due to “staff shortages” where the staff never seem to materialise.
Perhaps these companies should have to say how many FULL-TIME equivalent staff they are promising and should then be monitored by Trading Standards!
But seriously, the constant boasting and the house-building that is meant to go with these so-called jobs is seriously skewed as the low hours workers can never aspire to owning them but the big businesses just continue to be economical with the truth.
West Country MPs rebel 220 times in Parliament – but East Devon MPs not quite so rebellious!
Most rebellious was MP Andrew George (Lib Dem) who has rebelled 56 times in 4 years. Honiton and Tiverton MP Neil Parish has rebelled twice against the Government in the 4-year life of this Parliament. Hugo Swire (East Devon) has never rebelled.
Old Etonians stick together perhaps!
Campaign at Woodbury Salterton
EDA’s Paul Arnott and John Withrington (Chairman and Vice-Chairman, EDA) were guest speakers at the Woodbury Salterton Residents Association meeting on Tuesday 3rd June. John was talking about Fight for Feniton and Paul about the Green Wedge campaign in Colyford/Seaton.
The village hall was packed with well-informed and motivated local people of all ages, and the association already has an impressive organisation and knowledge base. Its agenda and minutes are published on Its relatively new website which can be found at http://woodburysalterton.weebly.com/
Although the meeting was party-political neutral, news of Claire Wright’s candidacy for Parliament announced earlier in the day was met with some interest in the home village of the incumbent MP.
Big changes afoot in senior EDDC hierarchy?
Is this just a rumour? Or can we expect announcements soon?
Seeds of change
In this period of rebellion in the ballot box, the incumbent East Devon Member of Parliament may be expecting to have a battle on his hands at the next election, less than twelve months’ from now (May 2015). As signalled in our earlier post, one very popular, Independent, County and District Councillor, a signatory of the EDA Charter, has today declared her intention to stand against him, and others may of course follow ( We’ll keep you informed). This was how Councillor Roger Giles, the long-standing and much respected District Councillor for Ottery St Mary, introduced her to the assembly in Sidmouth:
“A very warm welcome to everyone. Welcome to the Dissenters’ Room, which was provided by Annie Leigh Browne. Annie Leigh Bowne is a local heroine who not only gave Sidmouth the Byes and the Cottage Hospital, but was also a leading suffragist who successfully led the national campaign for women`s representation in local government, which was achieved in 1907.
A very appropriate location for the launch of Claire`s parliamentary campaign!
Many of you will know of all the fantastic work that Claire has done whilst she has been an East Devon District Councillor. She has been a beacon in the cause of openness and transparency and fairness at EDDC – often in the face of animosity and hostility from conservative party councillors.
One of her great successes was to expose the undue influence of East Devon Business Forum members on EDDC`s planning policies, and also the undue influence in their own members` planning applications. The Chairman of EDBF was former Councillor Graham Brown.
When Claire raised this matter at the EDDC meeting on 25 July 2012, she was accused by senior Conservative Councillors of:
“impugning integrity”; of engaging in “speculation, misinformation and
innuendo”; “debating through the media”; and making “scurrilous”
allegations.
There never has been an apology. Not even after the Daily Telegraph exposure of March 2013.
Claire has been amazingly energetic and persistent. Just look at some of the things she has done:
* Successfully campaigned to retain maternity services at Honiton Hospital
* Provided the first play park at West Hill
* Pressed for better protection for trees
* Fought against the Government relaxation of planning policy (NPPF)
* Vigorously opposed unnecessary and damaging levels of development on
greenfield sites in East Devon
* Got EDDC to allow recording of its meetings
* Pressed for the creation of a cycleway from Feniton to Ottery to Tipton to
Sidmouth on the disused railway line
* Regularly engaged with and sought the views of people, young and old
* Communicated extensively with electorate by various means, including the
extensive use of her excellent blog
* Opposed planned cuts to local services, and is currently fighting to save
Ottery`s youth centre, childrens centre, and library
* Pressed for openness and transparency in planning at EDDC, demanding
that planning committee members reveal if they have been lobbied
* Fought EDDC`s vanity project to relocate its offices at a cost of millions
of pounds of taxpayers money at a time when EDDC is slashing the
services it provides to the public
That is an amazing level of energy and determination.
Claire`s work was recognised by the electorate of the Ottery Rural ward in the Devon County Council elections of May 2013. She obtained 74% of the vote. She got the biggest vote; the biggest share of the vote; and the biggest majority of any councillor in the South West.
We know what you have done Claire – and we thank you for it.
And we are delighted to come here today to endorse your campaign to be the next Member of Parliament for East Devon.
Ladies and gentlemen I give you Claire Wright – our next MP.”
More comment, with photographs of today’s campaign launch at http://susiebond.wordpress.com/2014/06/03/cllr-claire-wright-launches-her-campaign-for-a-seat-at-westminster/
Overview and Scrutiny Agenda – meeting 12 June 2014, 6.30 p.m. Knowle – very little overseeing and almost no scrutiny and two elephants not in the room
The 154 page agenda for the next Overview and Scrutiny committee on 12 June 2014 at 6.30 p.m. at the Knowle is HERE
Mostly it is a re-hash of some old reports and surveys, a new report (NHS) and some other surveys done with very few people (in one case just 7). There is almost nothing that the Overview and Scrutiny Committee can do about any of the items on the agenda and one has to wonder why they are there as it is the items NOT on the agenda which are more important. For example, not a mention of the Business Task and Finish Forum (examining the influence of the disbanded East Devon Business Forum, Chairman – disgraced ex-councillor Graham Brown). It shows the current Overview and Scrutiny function as neither overseeing nor scrutinising.
They will not discuss relocation until at least the September 2014 meeting and even that is not guaranteed.
One little pearl hidden away in these 154 pages:
EDDC reviews a consultation exercise done in 2014 where many people were displeased with how EDDC runs its Planning function. Under “Actions we are taking” is this:
We will run an awareness campaign about the way we deal with planning applications especially how this operates within nationally laid down rules and regulations. This campaign will explain how the planning applicant is the council’s customer for the service as they have to pay for it.
And there’s us thinking that we are paying for this service through our Council Tax!
A little nugget on office relocation too which once again illustrates that the cart of desperately wanting shag pile has gone before the cart of what has to be done first:
Office Relocation
EDDC is looking to relocate their offices. This has already entailed some community consultation. We are also regularly engaging with a stakeholder group that includes Town and Parish Councils,
Chambers of Commerce and interested community groups. We are soon due to begin consulting widely on the impacts of moving to SkyPark of equalities groups and other affected people and organisations and carrying out Best Value consultation to make sure we get the best out of any move. This consultation will involve randomly selected households, businesses, equalities groups and others. The results will be presented to Cabinet as part of the decision making process.
If anyone is in one of the groups of randomly selected households, businesses, equalities groups and (ha, ha) “Others” we would love to know!
Oh, and if you come across the agenda item “Update on the corporate engagement work being carried out as part of the Organisational Development function of EDDC” – er, what this actually appears to mean is “Report on Public Consultation”!!!
Page 146 reveals that our Chief Executive budgeted as costing a total of £86,500 per year for 2.5 days work each week. That would equate to an annual salary and extras totalling £173,000 (South Somerset pays 50% for their 2.5 days of his valuable time).
What would happen if they did this survey here?
http://www.westerndailypress.co.uk/Council-morale-rock/story-21179107-detail/story.html
100% of the staff would be happy 100% of the time with a 100% turnout wouldn’t they!
East Devon Watch 