Category Archives: Accountability

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

15 May 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Accountable Care Organisation, Austerity cuts, Claire Wright, Health and Social Care (local), Honiton/ Gittisham, Inequality, NHS (local), Seaton/ Colyford / Colyton

Claire Wright responds on threat to close Honiton and Seaton hospital day services

“Seaton and Honiton Hospitals may be at risk, local GP and chair of the NEW Devon CCG’s Eastern Locality, Dr Simon Kerr reportedly revealed at a meeting with health campaigners last month.

Dr Kerr was apparently speaking of the long-awaited Estates Strategy, which will list all the assets held by the local NHS and what it plans to do with them.

NEW Devon CCG is in considerable financial difficulty. Devon is one of three most financially challenged health trusts in the country.

The background is that 12 community hospitals across Eastern Devon were acquired by the private company (wholly owned by the Secretary of State for Health) NHS Property Services, last year.

As yet, we haven’t heard about the fate of the remaining 10 community hospitals now in the ownership of NHS Property Services. This of course, includes our beloved Ottery Hospital, as well as Exmouth, Sidmouth, Whipton, Okehampton and Crediton.

Many of these hospitals, including Seaton, Honiton, Ottery St Mary and Okehampton and Whipton, have sadly now been stripped of their beds in cost cutting measures. But they still are home to a range of services and clinics that are very much needed locally.

Up until now, NHS England has been picking up the tab for the extortionate rents charged by NHS PS, of well over £3m a year, across the area.

A stupid stupid system, set up to fail. All over the country health trusts are being forced to sell off estate because it can’t afford the ridiculous rents charged by NHS PS for a building that used to be in NHS ownership.

Honiton Hospital has a treatment centre and is home to East Devon’s out of hours GP service.

The idea that the building could be lost and with it the treatment centre and out of hours service is totally ludicrous and appalling. The RD&E’s A&E department is full to capacity much of the time and staff are struggling to manage the volume of patients.

It means someone unwell living in the far east of the area – Axminster, for example, would have to travel around an hour to Exeter, to be seen by a GP if they were unwell out of working hours. It is quite unacceptable.

The amazing maternity unit which has been ‘temporarily’ closed for the best part of a year, was also based at Honiton Hospital.

There are so many cuts to the health service now it is difficult to keep up with them, let alone fight them.

Cllr Shaw has written to the CCG chair, Dr Tim Burke demanding assurances that the buildings remain open.

I have asked for an urgent item on the next Health and Adult Scrutiny Committee agenda, which is held on Thursday 7 June.

I will keep you posted.

Here’s Cllr Shaw’s blog – https://seatonmatters.org/2018/05/14/ccg-chair-says-seaton-and-honiton-hospitals-at-risk-of-closure-in-local-estates-strategy/

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

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

15 May 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Accountable Care Organisation, Austerity cuts, Honiton/ Gittisham, Inequality, Integrated Care Systems, NHS (local)

“Suspension of birth services at Honiton Hospital extended”

“The suspension of birth services at Honiton maternity unit has been extended.

The Royal Devon and Exeter NHS Foundation Trust (RDE) has today delayed its reintroduction until mid-September 2018.

The Trust took the decision last year to temporarily suspend births and subsequent in-patient stays at Honiton Hospital.

It said the step was taken to maintain patient safety due to a combination of factors affecting the stability of the services at this site and the other units it operates in Tiverton and Exeter.

Zita Martinez, head of midwifery at the RDE, said: “We are sorry for this continued suspension in services. Although we have successfully recruited to a number of our midwifery vacancies, we are still managing a high level of staff absence, including maternity leave.

At the same time, the positively received implementation of national policy in the Better Births and Saving Babies’ Lives guidance has meant that the complexity and acuity of women and babies we are caring for has significantly increased.

“This means that our main maternity unit in Exeter is experiencing greater levels of demand on the specialist care that we provide.

“In the context of increasing complexity, re-opening Honiton maternity unit for births and in-patient stays would result in the Trust stretching our workforce too far and potentially compromising safety in our other delivery units.”

The Trust has agreed with NEW Devon Clinical Commissioning Group to extend the suspension of births and subsequent in-patient stays at both Honiton and Okehampton until mid-September 2018 in order to ensure the safety of services across a wider geographical footprint and therefore, for more women and babies.

All antenatal and post-natal appointments, support clinics and home births will continue as normal in both communities.”

http://www.midweekherald.co.uk/news/suspension-of-birth-services-at-honiton-hospital-extended-1-5517432

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

14 May 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Privatisation, Transport (local)

Tories to nationalise rail line!

Owl says: well, this will take some explaining!!!

“Chris Grayling is expected to make a decision “within days” to end the existing East Coast rail franchise operated by Stagecoach and Virgin Trains.

The transport secretary was said to be preparing to either renationalise the London to Edinburgh line or negotiate a “not-for-profit” arrangement with Stagecoach and Virgin Trains before the end of the week. …

Ministers have denied that the companies are being bailed out, saying they will lose a £165m performance bond and face other penalties. Beyond 2020, the government is expected to introduce a new public-private partnership model on the line.

Virgin Trains East Coast said it had “met or exceeded” all of its contractual commitments on the East Coast line. The DfT declined to comment.”

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/may/14/east-coast-rail-franchise-to-be-scrapped-chris-grayling

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

14 May 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Accountable Care Organisation, Austerity cuts, Health and Social Care (local), Honiton/ Gittisham, Integrated Care Systems, Martin Shaw (Seaton), NHS (local)

Comments

1 Comment

East Devon Alliance DCC Martin Shaw responds to threat of full closure of Seaton Hospital

“Martin​ Shaw
County Councillor for Seaton and Colyton​

LETTER TO THE CHAIR OF NEW DEVON CCG

Dear Dr Burke,

We have seen draft notes prepared by 38 Degrees of your meeting with them on April 5th. According to these, Simon Kerr said (before your own arrival) that Seaton and Honiton hospitals were ‘at risk’ in the coming Estates Strategy. These remarks, written down at the time, have been confirmed to us by several participants. While we appreciate that no formal decision may have been taken, there seems little reason not to take them as a clear indication of CCG thinking.

As the two elected local politicians on the organising group of Seaton Health Matters, the community conversation launched together together with the CCG and RD&E, we hosted Dr Kerr at the launch meeting on 23rd March, which also heard Em Wilkinson-Bryce (copied in) appeal to the audience to trust in the ‘good intentions’ of the speakers from the NHS organisations. We have no reason at all to doubt her sincerity, but it is difficult for us to believe in the good faith of Dr Kerr and the CCG, as (unless he had only just picked up the names of the ‘at risk’ hospitals) it seems to us that you may have helped launched us into a discussion of local health needs knowing that you may be moving to deprive us of our major health resource, Seaton Hospital.

Our initial Health Matters discussion broached many areas of constructive cooperation between the local community and the NHS, which we are keen to pursue. However it also left no doubt of the need to maintain the 50+ outpatient services currently based in the Hospital, the desirability of bringing in additional services if place-based care is to be meaningful, and the needs of an elderly community (with significant pockets of deprivation and poor public transport) for as many clinics, etc., as possible on the doorstep rather than in other towns. We are ready to explore the possibility of a combined health hub for the Axe Valley, but on the basis that services would be more or less equally shared across the two hospitals and there would be no reduction in the overall level of services in each. The other thing that was clear from our discussion was that the community considers the Hospital a community resource since its building was half-funded by local donations and it has been maintained by local contributions ever since. I am sure that people in Axminster and Honiton feel the same about theirs.

You should not underestimate the local anger, only just subsiding, over the removal of beds from Seaton Hospital. It bears repeating that this was widely regarded, including outside Seaton, as an unjust choice based on a misuse of the JSNA data and misleading assumptions about the relative agedness of the populations of Seaton and Sidmouth (their age structure is in fact almost identical and the comparison did not justify a choice of Sidmouth over Seaton). It was also based on false claims that the Sidmouth option would involve a better geographical spread: a glance at the map would have shown that, on the contrary, it left the remaining community beds concentrated in the southwestern corner of East Devon with none in the Axe Valley. There is similar feeling in Honiton because the Your Future Care consultation did not even include an option which would have retained their hospital’s beds.

We mention this history not to try to reverse the beds decisions (although the shortage of beds in the recent winter should lead to it being looked at again) but because the treatment of Seaton and Honiton in those decisions should be a reason for generosity in the distribution of outpatient services and in the Estates Strategy. It is adding insult to injury to place Seaton and Honiton on a shortlist of potential closures. Having switched your decision last time against Seaton, you should now reconsider again in Seaton’s favour. This is not, of course, to suggest that any other hospital should be closed instead. On the contrary, all East Devon towns have community hospitals which reflect real local needs and you should be devising a system of health hubs which enables all communities to have a solid base for place-based care.

The next meeting of Seaton Health Matters is scheduled for 24th May. We do not wish it to be dominated by the fallout from Dr Kerr’s remarks but without an unequivocal assurance that Seaton Hospital will remain open, it is unavoidable that this will be the main topic of discussion.

We look forward to hearing from you at the earliest opportunity. We have also copied this to Sonja Manton since we discussed the Health Matters process with Em and her before it began. We should like to meet with you about this, but before the 24th any meeting would have to be late that afternoon or on the 23rd, as one of us is away until the morning of the 22nd.

Regards,

Martin Shaw
County Councillor for Seaton & Colyton

Jack Rowland
Seaton Town Council”

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

14 May 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Accountable Care Organisation, Austerity cuts, Health and Social Care (local), Honiton/ Gittisham, Integrated Care Systems, Martin Shaw (Seaton), NHS (local), Seaton/ Colyford / Colyton

Seaton and Honiton hospitals “at risk ” of full closure says CCG

“CCG chair says Seaton and Honiton hospitals ‘at risk’ of closure in Local Estates Strategy”

POSTED ON MAY 14, 2018 by Councillor Martin Shaw

It has been revealed that Dr Simon Kerr, Chair of NEW Devon CCG’s Eastern Locality, told a meeting with representatives of 38 Degrees on 5th April that Seaton and Honiton hospitals were ‘at risk’ in the CCG’s Local Estates Strategy due in July. His remarks were taken down by the 38 Degrees member who produced draft notes of the meeting, and have been confirmed by other participants, but have not yet been confirmed by the CCG.

Although the hospitals both lost their inpatient beds last summer, Seaton Hospital currently hosts over 50 outpatient services (and there are probably at least as many in Honiton). Both are vital community health resources, created with decades of financial and practical support from people all around the Seaton and Honiton areas.

As part of a move to promote ‘place-based care’, the CCG and RD&E are currently taking part in two ‘community health conversations’, Honiton’s Health Matters and Seaton and Area’s Health Matters, which local voluntary groups, town and parish councils etc. are involved in. However if place-based care means anything, it should mean that communities should keep their local hospitals as health hubs, with more rather than fewer services.

Together with Cllr Jack Rowland, who stood down as mayor of Seaton last week but remains the town council’s representative on the Health Matters organising group, have written to Dr Tim Burke, Chair of the CCG, to ask for an unequivocal assurance that the hospitals will remain open.

I am hoping to shortly announce a meeting of the hospital campaign group.”

https://seatonmatters.org/

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

14 May 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Accountable Care Organisation, Austerity cuts, Health and Social Care (local), Inequality, NHS (local)

“Patients trapped by care closures: Elderly face being STRANDED in hospital wards” [or just stranded if there are no hospital wards]

“In the past financial year, 148 care home businesses entered insolvency – an 83 per cent rise on the 81 failing in 2016-17.

The figures sparked a call for urgent action from the Government to tackle a growing crisis in social care which could impact badly on the NHS.

And experts warn of a “care home crash” as closures cause a shortage. Although the Government announced a £2billion package for social care over three years last year, local authorities are spending £6billion less than in 2010. …

Mike Padgham, chairman of the Independent Care Group which advises care providers in north Yorkshire, said: “We have been warning for years that the £6billion cut from social care would eventually mean more and more care homes closing.

“For every home closure there are older and vulnerable people either forced to find somewhere else to live or unable to have a place.

“About 1.2 million people are now going without the care they need and unless action is taken this will very soon be us. We now face a further £2.3billion funding shortfall and that is going to mean more and more people not getting care. …

Local authorities in England and Wales had planned to make savings of £824million in their social care budgets in 2017-18 according to the Associate Directors of Adult Social Services, despite demand increasing as the population ages.

A Competition and Markets Authority report highlighted a £1billion shortfall in public sector funding of care homes in 2017 and the Local Government Association says that the sector faces a £2.3billion gap by 2020.

Accountancy firm Moore Stephens, which released the insolvency figures, found the cost of providing a high standard of care has increased over the years. The National Living Wage rose again last month to £7.83.

It stood at £6.70 just three years ago. The annual rise places increased strain on care home margins. The average home now spends 52 per cent of its turnover on wages. …

A report by the Public Accounts Committee in September said that an “intolerable” number of older patients were waiting too long to be discharged from hospital, costing the NHS £170million a year.

The MPs said that every day, 3,500 older people remain in hospital in England after being declared fi t to leave because arrangements had not been made for them to move. In 2011, operator Southern Cross shut down and as many as 31,000 elderly and vulnerable residents had to find somewhere else to live. …”

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/959234/care-home-crisis-uk-government-elderly-care-bankruptcy

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

14 May 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Privatisation

How privatisation and outsourcing of public services fails

And, at the time, directors changed rules so they would get more protection from the losses.

“Carillion used suppliers to “prop up a failing business model” and conceal true levels of debt, say MPs investigating the failed government contractor.

The parliamentary inquiry into the collapse of a company that provided a host of vital public services, including catering in schools, prison maintenance and construction of new NHS hospitals will conclude on Wednesday with the publication of the MPs’ final report. It is expected to name and shame those responsible for the failure of the listed company, which had a UK staff of nearly 20,000 when it crashed into administration in January.

Carillion bosses displayed ‘greed on stilts’, MPs claim

In a taste of what is to come, the work and pensions committee chairman, Frank Field, said: “Carillion displayed utter contempt for its suppliers, many of them the small businesses that are the lifeblood of the UK’s economy.

“The company used its suppliers as a line of credit to shore up its fragile balance sheet, then in another of its accounting tricks ‘reclassified’ this borrowing to hide the true extent of its massive debt.”

Field’s comments came as the joint inquiry with the business, energy and industrial strategy committee, published evidence from Santander, the bank that operated the company’s early payment facility. Its loss was one of the events Carillion’s directors attempted to blame for its eventual failure.

However, in the letter the Santander chief risk officer, Patricia Halliday, sets out why the bank pulled the plug on the facility in December 2017. In the wake of a profit warning that summer, Halliday said Santander had worked with other banks on a refinancing plan contingent on the company making disposals.

“Despite the provision of these new money commitments and continued close engagement with Carillion into December, the envisaged disposals did not take place and the detailed business and restructuring plans originally expected to be received by 8 December were further delayed,” Halliday writes. “This series of events … further undermined Santander’s confidence in Carillion’s financial position.

“In light of the lack of progress with the restructuring plan, Santander took the decision to terminate the … facility,” she adds. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/may/14/carillion-displayed-utter-contempt-for-suppliers-frank-field

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

12 May 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Democracy, East Devon Alliance, Inequality, Voting

Still time to register for the free East Devon Alliance conference in Honiton next week

“All across East Devon people are worried about their HEALTH, their HOMES and their JOBS. Never has it been more important to involve yourself with local democracy in your district..

YOU CAN MAKE THE DIFFERENCE

The EAST DEVON ALLIANCE is trying to help with all of this, an umbrella group of Independent people, who since 2015 have won 7 district council seats and 1 county seat. The EDA is free from the negative influence of national parties who – at East Devon District Council – have acquired the arrogant habits of a Conservative one-party state.

This conference is for YOU. Speakers will include County Councillors CLAIRE WRIGHT and MARTIN SHAW, and PAM BARRETT, Chair of the Independent Buckfastleigh Town Council and regional expert on transforming democracy from the bottom up.

In two sessions you will be able to hear our experience and then CONTRIBUTE your own personal views:

a) how did the democratic deficit in East Devon happen? Or – the problem.
b) what can we do about it through democracy in our parishes, towns and district. Or – the solution.

Please come. We are all volunteers but if we band together now to fight for hospitals, homes and jobs we have a chance to change how our local area is run.

Parking: nearest is Lace Walk. 2 minute walk. If full, New Street, 5 mins”

https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/east-devons-time-for-a-change-peoples-conference-tickets-45482525458?utm-medium=discovery&utm-campaign=social&utm-content=attendeeshare&aff=esfb&utm-source=fb&utm-term=listing

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

12 May 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Accountable Care Organisation, Austerity cuts, Health and Social Care (local), Inequality, Integrated Care Systems, NHS (local)

The cost of austerity and underfunding – 20,000 extra deaths last winter

We cost the NHS and Social Services nothing when we are dead.

“Researchers have called for an urgent investigation to find an explanation for more than 20,000 ‘additional deaths’ so far this year, amid severe pressure on the NHS.

Figures from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) show that in the first sixteen weeks of the year, there were 20,215 more deaths in England and Wales compared to the previous five years.

In March, academics raised concerns that Britain was facing a rise in mortality and argued that “health chiefs are failing to investigate a clear pattern of worsening health outcomes”, in an editorial for the British Medical Journal (BMJ).

The piece centred on the finding that there were 10,000 ‘additional deaths’ in the first seven weeks of the year and concluded “that neither ‘flu, nor cold weather appeared to be the main cause.”

Now the authors have now updated their findings to account for fresh statistics covering the first sixteen weeks of the year.

Their response, published on the BMJ website this week, argues that the latest statistics “sadly provide little reassurance of this being a ‘blip’ as some have suggested.”

There were 198,943 deaths in the first sixteen weeks of 2018, compared to an average of 178,778 deaths in the same period over the previous five years. The rise represents an 11.3 per cent increase on the five year average.

The weekly average for the same period was 12,434 deaths, ahead of the five year average of 11,174. The 20,215 figure is equivalent to an ‘additional death’ every eight minutes throughout the first sixteen weeks of the year. …”

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/05/11/calls-urgent-investigation-explain-20000-additional-deaths/

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

11 May 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Conflict of interest, Corruption, Privatisation, Scrutiny, Sleaze, Transparency

What a surprise! “Outsourced public services ‘still not adopting ethical standards’ “

“Little significant progress has been made on reinforcing ethical standards in outsourced public services, a Lords committee has cautioned.

It also suggested a consultation be set up looking at whether the Freedom of Information Act should apply to private sector providers working on public sector contracts, the Lords committee on standards in public life also said in report out yesterday.

Chair Lord Bew noted “very little progress” had been made on implementing the recommendations of the committee’s 2014 report, aimed at enhancing the ethical standards of contractors commissioned by the public sector.

“Disappointingly, very little progress has been made on implementing these recommendations and evidence shows that most service providers need to do more to demonstrate best practice in ethical standards,” Bew said.

He called for services providers to “recognise that the Nolan Principles apply to them, for moral courage among key financial and other professionals in securing and maintaining high ethical standards”.

The Nolan Principles were drawn up in 1995 and are seven ethical standards people in public office are expected to uphold: selflessness, integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty and leadership.

Bew added: “Some [service providers] remain dismissive of the Nolan Principles or adopt a ‘pick and mix’ approach which is not in the public interest.”

The committee noted one-third of government spending is on external providers and that “the public is clear that they expect common ethical standards”. But some providers were not applying these public sector ethical standards in their work, the Lords concluded.

Bew said the committee called for a “consultation on the extension of the application of the Freedom of Information Act to private sector providers where information relates to the performance of a contract with government for the delivery of public services”.

The committee recommended that service providers should acknowledge the Nolan Principles applied to them.

Bew also said: “The committee remains of the view that more must be done to encourage strong and robust cultures of ethical behaviour in those delivering public services.”

The CSPL report suggested commissioners of services should include a ‘statement of intent’ in addition to contracts to set out the ethical behaviours expected by the government.

In the light of the collapse of Carillion, the committee suggested it is “essential” that ethical standards are reinforced for those delivering services with public money.

The report released yesterday is one in a series being done by the committee on ethical standards of providers of public services.”

https://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2018/05/outsourced-public-services-still-not-adopting-ethical-standards

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

11 May 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Freedom of Information Act, Local Enterprise Partnership, Scrutiny, Transparency

“Consult on extending FOI to private sector providers of public services: watchdog”

Owl says: can’t come a moment too soon for EDDC, Ccou table/Integrated Care System companies and our Local Enterprise Partnership!

“The Committee for Standards in Public Life has called for a consultation on whether the Freedom of Information Act should apply to private sector providers where information relates to the performance of a public service contract.

In its latest report, The Continuing Importance of Ethical Standards for Public Service Providers, the CSPL said there had been little real progress on measures to enforce ethical standards in outsourced public services.
It urged the government, service providers and professionals to do more to encourage robust cultures of ethical behaviour in public service delivery.
Lord Bew, Chair of the Committee on Standards in Public Life, said: “From waste disposal to health care and probation services, all kinds of public services are routinely supplied to many of us by private or voluntary sector organisations, paid for with public funds – accounting for almost one third of government spending in 2017.

“The public is clear that they expect common ethical standards – whoever is delivering the service – and that when things go wrong there is transparency and accountability about what has happened.”

Lord Bew said that, “disappointingly”, very little progress had been made on implementing the recommendations in the CSPL’s 2014 report, Ethical standards for providers of public services. He added that evidence showed that most service providers needed to do more to demonstrate best practice in ethical standards.

“In particular, we remain concerned over the lack of internal governance and leadership on ethical standards in those departments with significant public service contracts. Departmental and management boards spend little, if any, time considering ethical considerations and tend to delegate such issues ‘down the line’. Those involved in commissioning and auditing contracts remain too focused on the quantitative rather than the qualitative aspects of their role. And departments lack clear lines of accountability when contracts fail,” the CSPL’s chair said.

He added: “While many service providers have developed a greater awareness of their ethical obligations in recent years, partly due to the high-profile failure of some organisations to adhere to these standards, some remain dismissive of the Nolan Principles or adopt a ‘pick and mix’ approach, which is not in the public interest. And many service providers continue to expect that setting and enforcing ethical standards remain a matter for government alone.”

Lord Bew said the committee remained of the view that more must be done to encourage strong and robust cultures of ethical behaviour in those delivering public services. “To that end, the Committee reaffirms the recommendations made in its 2014 report and has made a further set of more detailed, follow-up recommendations to address particular issues of concern.”

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=35218%3Aconsult-on-extending-foi-to-private-sector-providers-of-public-services-watchdog&catid=59&Itemid=27

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

11 May 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Hugo Swire

Young political adviser to George Osborne “carried more authority” than Swire

Matt Hancock was one of the “Cameron/Osborne gang” in the last parliament, acting as a SpAd (Special Adviser) to Osborne. He became an MP in 2010 and is now Cabinet Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport. In a (somewhat critical and unflattering profile of him there on an influential Conservative website there is an interesting bit of information on Hugo Swire:

“Hancock became Osborne’s chief of staff, sat with Ed Llewellyn (who played the same role for Cameron) in the room between their bosses’ rooms, attended the morning meetings in Cameron’s room and the preparation sessions for Prime Minister’s Questions.

“He was there throughout,” a Cameroon says. “He really was part of the gang.” A shadow minister of those years, pursuing a less gilded path, recalls:

“I knew him as one of the SpAds [Special Advisers – political Appointees] who wanted more power than shadow ministers. If Matt said something, it was his master’s voice [Osborne’s]. It carried more authority than, say, HUGO SWIRE.”

However, he and Swire apparently shared some characteristics:

“I have to say I never took to the man [Hancock]. Clearly able in a Bank of England sort of way. But devoid of principle, transparently ambitious and pleased with himself beyond measure.”

https://www.conservativehome.com/highlights/2018/05/profile-matt-hancock-the-osborne-acolyte-who-managed-to-survive-and-prosper.html

So now we know – a junior MP had more authority than Swire!

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

10 May 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Bovis, Developers/ Development

“Bovis homebuyers offered ‘cash in return for positive feedback’, investigation reveals”

“Homebuilding firm Bovis Homes is at the centre of a new row after an investigation by The Independent found that some customers had allegedly been offered rewards in return for completing positive satisfaction surveys.
Last year the company was awarded a 2-star rating by the House Builders Federation after a well-documented series of failings that left customers living in faulty homes.

Now, nine homebuyers have said that Bovis representatives offered them rewards if they agreed to fill in the HBF customer satisfaction form, the results of which are used to inform the annual ratings.

Five customers say the incentives were offered in return for positive feedback, something Bovis adamantly denies.

The homebuyers spoken to by The Independent bought their properties at different Bovis developments between 2016 and 2018.

Charlotte and Michael Kenton, who purchased their home in Bedfordshire in June 2016, claimed their site manager offered them high street vouchers in return for positive feedback.

“He said it was directly linked to his bonus so if we were happy with the sales process we should give him 5 stars and he could ‘make it worth our while,” they said.

Another couple claimed a Bovis employee offered free turf and John Lewis vouchers in December 2017 if they gave good feedback on the HBF survey or if they let the Bovis sales representatives fill in the form themselves.

In a further example, a homebuyer who bought her property in Oxfordshire in January 2017, said she was offered vouchers if she gave a positive response to the question of whether she would recommend Bovis to a friend.

She said: “We filled out the [HBF/NHBC] survey, gave 1 star at most, but we were told we would be given £500 worth of vouchers if we recommended Bovis to a friend.”

Another homebuyer, who wished to remain anonymous, said her site manager told her in February 2017 he would extend her patio for her if she gave him a good review.

She told The Independent: “I was advised by the site manager that the feedback form was very important and if you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours… he intimated that he would contribute towards turning a side garden into an extra parking spot if we looked after each other…”

In another instance, in February this year, a Bovis site manager sent a customer an email – seen by The Independent – confirming that the company would pay a month’s worth of household bills but appeared to require her to complete the HBF survey before sending copies of her bills.

The buyer was sent a cheque for more than £1,000 after she completed the survey.

The Independent understands that Bovis had advised the customer that the payment was compensation for inconvenience after the homebuyer’s kitchen was damaged (and not related to the survey).

Four other homebuyers, who have spoken to The Independent on condition of anonymity, were allegedly offered bottles of champagne, chocolates or contributions towards remedial work if they agreed to complete the survey.

Bovis stated that up until May 2016, it ran a programme offering customers incentives to complete feedback forms – irrespective of whether the response was positive or negative – but said the practice had been stopped.

Five of the nine homebuyers spoken to by The Independent claim they were offered incentives after Bovis told its representatives to change the policy.

HBF’s national survey of housebuilders was launched in 2005 in response to recommendations in the Barker Review of Housing in 2004 and results determine a house builder’s annual rating. Since 2013, ratings are based on just the one question: ‘Would you recommend your builder to a friend?’

In a statement, Bovis said it had made significant changes to its build quality and customer service, which had transformed the company. It added that it had a strict policy with regards to the HBF customer survey.

A spokesman said: “Currently more than 87 per cent of our customers across the country would recommend us to friends and family, representing a 30 percentage point improvement on where we were at the same time last year.

“There are strict rules around the management of the HBF customer survey and we are absolutely committed to adhering to those.

“In the current survey year, which started on 1 October 2017, we have so far received more than 740 surveys, and around 87 per cent of those returned would recommend us to family or friends.

“If there is any evidence that any one of those hundreds of positive responses – or any from previous years – were not returned according to the rules, then we would wish to see that evidence and we would investigate it thoroughly.”

In relation to the case in which £1,000 of a homebuyer’s bills had been paid, Bovis said it was investigating the claim that payment had been conditional on the customer completing her feedback form.

A spokesman said: “On this point, we are currently investigating one claim made by a customer to The Independent, where it appears that our processes and procedures have not been followed and the colleague involved has been removed from site while we make further enquiries.”

When new CEO Greg Fitzgerald took charge of Bovis – after the resignation of David Ritchie in January 2017 – he promised to ensure that the house builder was no longer “handing over crap or incomplete houses to customers”.

Mr Fitzgerald, who made the statement after Bovis was found to have been paying homebuyers as much as £3,000 to move into unfinished homes in a failed attempt to reach an ambitious target of completing 4,131 houses by the end of the financial year, served six years as a company director for the National House Builders Council, the UK’s main home construction warranty provider, prior to his appointment.

However, The Independent has been told by several homebuyers that problems with quality remain.

Allison Briggs, 49, said that her hi-spec washing machine was broken on the day she moved into her property on a development in April 2017.

When Bovis later replaced it, she claimed the whole house vibrated when was the washing machine was on.

She told The Independent: “I am living in a Bovis nightmare. I wish I could walk away.”

Another, who bought their property in January 2017, said they had experienced problems immediately. But when they approached Bovis, the house builder allegedly told them the house being situated on a corner caused the issues.

They told The Independent: “We raised the issue again with Bovis and yet again we were told every excuse possible.”

In a statement, Bovis said: “We are committed to continuing to drive through these improvements in our business and to deal with any customer issues by our home warranty.

In those rare instances where items might be disputed, then we welcome the involvement of external agencies, such as the NHBC, to objectively assess the issues, and we are committed to meeting all of our obligations in these instances.”

“We apologise to any customer who did not move into the home they deserved in the past, but we are concerned that using isolated historic case studies as a reflection of our current performance misrepresents the business and will have a negative impact for those thousands of satisfied Bovis Homes customers who are not being contacted by the media for their experiences of buying a new-build home.”

Buyers across the UK claim the house builder sells properties that are “not fit for purpose”, with some residents reporting issues relating to insulation, flooding, structural issues and rendering.

A Facebook group called Bovis Homes Victim Group has grown to more than 3,000 members and common complaints among them are a lack of sound insulation, incorrect appliances, dented doors, flooding and thermal issues.

A number of disgruntled homeowners have reached settlements with Bovis, the terms of which are sometimes protected by non-disclosure agreements.

Bovis said: “We want open and honest feedback – positive and negative – from all of our customers so that we can build on the major improvements we have driven through the business and further enhance the experience of buying a Bovis Home.”

Dave Howard, a founder of the group, which operates the domain http://www.bovishomesvictimsgroup.co.uk and the owner of a £400,000 home in Oxfordshire, said he continues to work closely with the firm.

“We continue to attempt to work constructively with Bovis Homes as members of its Homebuyers Panel but have yet to detect any noticeable improvement in either build quality or customer service.

Obviously, from both our perspective and that of our members, this is extremely disappointing.”

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/bovis-homebuyers-cash-property-newbuilds-housing-developers-a8330766.html

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

10 May 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Accountable Care Organisation, Austerity cuts, Health and Social Care (local), Hugo Swire, Integrated Care Systems, NHS (local)

Swire discovers “health hubs”

“Written Answers – Department of Health and Social Care: Health Services (9 May 2018)

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2018-04-30.139412.h&s=speaker%3A11265#g139412.q0

Hugo Swire: To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, what his Department’s policy is on the establishment of health and wellbeing hubs in former community hospitals.”

Owl’s policy is that NHS community hospitals are much more important than commercial juice bars and personal trainers and should therefore be funded BEFORE health hubs, not abandoned to insert “health hubs” in their place.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

10 May 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Conflict of interest, Corruption, Lobbying, Sleaze

The new sleazy politics: “shadow lobbying”

A new one to add to cash for questions, conflicts of interest, payments in kind and direct lobbying:

“The disclosure that Donald Trump’s legal fixer Michael Cohen was quietly paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to advise corporations highlights the inability of US laws to prevent secretive “shadow lobbying”, analysts said.

Companies such as the telecoms giant AT&T and Novartis, a major pharmaceuticals firm, confirmed they paid Cohen, the president’s personal attorney, large sums last year in return for what they describe as guidance on navigating the new administration. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/may/10/payments-to-michael-cohen-show-how-shadow-lobbying-eludes-us-law

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

9 May 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Affordable and Social Housing, Developers/ Development, Inequality, Planning System

“Will the Tories’ starter homes initiative ever get off the ground?”

“Q Is anything ever likely to come of the starter homes initiative? It was launched amid much fanfare by George Osborne towards the end of 2014 but there has been little news since, beyond a few stories regarding funding concerns.

Meanwhile, the starter homes newsletter, which was getting increasingly infrequent and was only ever a series of adverts for developments (none of which contained starter homes) seems to have dried up, and the dedicated starter homes website simply links back to a generic new homes website, as it did when it was launched.

I had been holding off buying a house as the promised minimum discount of 20% sounds worth waiting for, but I’m beginning to question whether it was only ever a cynical attempt to woo millennial voters, to be abandoned at the first opportunity.
AB

A Given the dearth of news about the starter homes scheme, it’s tempting to think that it has been quietly shelved – not least because it was an initiative announced when the Tories were in coalition with the Lib Dems.

But in fact, shortly after the current government came to power, it was announced that the original target of 100,000 new starter homes to be built by 2020 would be doubled. So potentially 200,000 first-time buyers aged between 23 and 40 with a household income of £80,000 or less (£90,000 in London) will be able to buy new-build properties at a discount of at least 20% where the discounted price is less than £450,000 in London but £250,000 everywhere else in England. The starter homes will generally be built on underused or unviable brownfield land previously used for commercial or industrial purposes.

Those first-time buyers shouldn’t hold their breath, however, as no starter homes have yet been completed. And at the beginning of last year only 71 sites across England had received grants from the Starter Home Land Fund to enable local authorities to acquire and/or prepare suitable land for starter home developments. So a lot depends on where you live if you want to take advantage of the scheme. First-time buyers in Burnley won’t have to wait much longer as, in partnership with Barnfield Investment Properties, Burnley council started work on the first phase of residential apartments back in February 2017.

If you don’t happen to live in Burnley, finding out about starter home developments in your local area is hard and the new homes website you mention is no help at all. The alternative to waiting for a discounted starter home would be to look into the help-to-buy scheme where you get a loan of up to 20% from government towards the purchase of a new-build property.”

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2018/may/09/uk-starter-homes-initiative-theresa-may-target

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

9 May 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Planning System, Section 106

Parish council successfully overturns officer “delegated authority” decision

“A parish council recently enjoyed success in a legal challenge over a purported exercise of delegated authority. Meyric Lewis explains how.

Newton Longville Parish Council has secured a quashing order by consent in their judicial review challenge to a grant of planning permission by Aylesbury Vale District Council under purported exercise of delegated authority.

District Council members resolved to grant planning permission for residential development “delegated to officers… subject to such conditions as are considered appropriate and to include a condition requiring that a reserved matters application be made within 18 months of the date of permission and that any permission arising from that application be implemented within 18 months”.

In exercising their delegated authority, officers took the view that there was insufficient justification for shortening the period for applying for reserved matters and for requiring implementation within 18 months. But that matter was neither raised with members nor addressed in the delegated report published by the Council.

In committee, members had wished to impose these short timeframes because they were concerned about the length of time that the site had remained undeveloped notwithstanding the existence of planning permission granted in 2007 and then renewed in 2011 and so they wished to encourage the building out of the site more swiftly than if longer timeframes were allowed.

Permission to apply for judicial review was granted by the High Court on the ground that the decision went beyond the terms of the delegated authority because it conflicted with the confined terms of the members’ resolution.

Permission was also granted on a ground concerning the related section 106 agreement and in respect of officers’ failure to provide adequate reasons, as required by under reg. 7 of the Openness of Local Government Bodies Regulations 2014, in that they did not address the matters relied on as justifying a departure from the terms of the members’ resolution in the delegated report.

The District Council and Interested Party have now signed a consent order submitting to judgment on all grounds.

Significant points to note on the case are that:

The parish council’s grounds distinguished Ouseley J’s decision on implied delegated authority in R (Couves) v. Gravesham BC [2015] EWHC 504 (Admin) because of the specific requirements as to time frames stipulated by members, see Couves at 47

It highlights the importance of officers going back to the terms of any resolution delegating authority to them and ensuring that their proposed action complies with its terms.

Developers and potential challengers will be astute to perform the exercise under (2) to see if a challenge can be mounted.

So there are practical consequences for officers, similar to when they receive an engrossment of a section 106, that they check the terms of what was resolved/agreed before issuing a formal grant of permission.”

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?view=article&catid=63%3Aplanning-articles&id=35128%3Aexercising-delegated-authority-in-planning&format=pdf&option=com_content&Itemid=31

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

8 May 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Accountable Care Organisation, Austerity cuts, Health and Social Care (local), Inequality, NHS (local), Rural communities

” ‘Perfect storm’ over rural social care costs”

“Rural residents are unfairly penalised when it comes to Improved Better Care Funding, MPs have been told.

The Rural Services Network issued the warning in response to an inquiry by MPs who are examining the long-term future of adult social care.

The Long Term Funding of Adult Social Care Inquiry is being undertaken by the Housing, Communities and Local Government Committee of the House of Commons.

Submitting evidence to the inquiry, the Rural Services Network said the average predominantly urban resident will attract £37.74 per head in Improved Better Care Funding in 2019/20.

This is £8.20 more than rural residents who attract just £29.54 per head.

In 2017/18 Adult Social Care Core Funding is met by Council Tax to the tune of 76% in rural areas compared to just 53% in urban.

The Rural Services Network said there was no relationship between the numbers of people requiring social care and either Council Tax or Business Rates.

Growth in business rates or council tax income is in no way correlated to the service needs of care services, it pointed out.

“It is obvious that the rising costs of caring for the growing elderly population cannot be met by local taxation and must be funded per capita by central government,” said the network.

In rural areas, there are significantly more residents aged 65+, fewer businesses required to pay business rates and Council Tax levels are already much higher than in urban areas.

The network added: “Thus, there is created a ‘perfect storm’ of rising costs and limited income in the rural areas across England.”

Cost pressures in Social Care Services mean county and unitary councils serving rural areas are having to cut other budgets to the detriment of the well-being of rural residents and businesses.

Council tax per head is reflected in the Final Settlement for 2018/19 is £541.46 for Predominantly Rural Areas compared to £450.58 in Predominantly Urban Areas.

“The gap, at circa £91 per head, is inexcusable,” said the network.

There appears to be a conscious policy decision by the government that in rural areas Spending Power will be increasingly funded by council-taxpayers, it added.

In other words, the government appeared content for people in rural areas to pay more council tax from lower incomes and yet receive fewer services than their urban counterparts.

“This is manifestly unreasonable and totally inequitable,” said the network.

The role of preventative services in respect of adult social care was not formally recognised by government and district councils were not funded for public health.

With increasing pressures on district council budgets, there remained uncertainty as to how public health interventions delivered at a local level would be funded in the future.

http://www.rsnonline.org.uk/perfect-storm-over-rural-social-care-costs

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

8 May 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Hugo Swire, Inequality, Neil Parish, Transparency, Voting

Comments

2 Comments

“These are the MPs who voted to keep government Windrush documents secret”

… Parish, Neil

… Swire, Hugo

https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/these-are-the-mps-who-voted-to-keep-government-windrush-document-secret/

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

8 May 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Inequality, Rural communities, Somerset

“Crumbling Britain: how austerity is hollowing out the heart of Tory Somerset”

The article takes the town of Dulverton and charts its decline due to council austerity cuts. Just change Dulverton to any rural area in Devon and you have the same story.

“Richard Eales pulls off his walking shoes and sits back on the sofa in his caravan, where he lives with his wife and their four-year-old son. Wisps of dog hair stick to his khaki polo shirt, which bears the badge: “Exmoor National Park Ranger”. His three dogs, Jet, Star and Sky, settle at his feet.

The 40-year-old father has been living for 17 years on the edge of Dulverton, a remote rural town in west Somerset known as the “gateway to Exmoor”. From managing the native pony herds and deer to grappling with farmers and landowners, Eales says: “It’s not a job; it’s a way of life. You’re always on duty.”Even when opening a tab at the pub, he’s logged as “National Park – Richard”. As he travels around Dulverton’s narrow streets in his mud-splattered Land Rover, the tall and gregarious figure seems to know everyone.

His first child Thomas attended Little Owls, the local nursery, from the “the age of nought”. The nursery opens 8am-6pm Monday to Friday, 49 weeks a year, for children up until the age of four.

But the family might not be here much longer.”Little Owls nursery is facing spending cuts, and Richard’s wife, Rebecca, who works as a dental hygienist, is three months’ pregnant. The nearest alternative nursery would add almost two hours to their daily drive, which would, in effect, stop them working.

Yet Eales and other parents isolated deep in this wooded valley have been told that Little Owls’ hours are likely to be reduced after the next academic year to 9am-3.30pm Monday to Thursday, term-time only, with no provision for under-twos. “We couldn’t afford to live if Bex [my wife] wasn’t working,” Eales says.

The current nursery provision is only continuing until July 2019. It applies for emergency money to keep the hours that it does, which is not deemed sustainable. A Somerset county council spokesperson tells me the nursery “applied for and recently received a grant from the Sustainability Fund and can apply again”​ but that “these grants are to help providers while they look for ways of being sustainable in the long term and we are currently helping the nursery do that”.​

“I look at other families and I can see why they’re claiming [benefits],” Eales sighs. “We’d be far better off money-wise if we moved further away. You stick it for as long as you can, but you get these hurdles chucked in front of you that keep getting bigger.”

Dulverton’s state provision has been rolled back. Its Sure Start children’s centre was “de-designated” (transferred to the local school and stripped of many services) in 2014 – a precursor to this year’s decision to close two-thirds of Sure Start buildings in Somerset.

Recent government figures reveal that more than 500 Sure Start centres – established by the last Labour government in 1998 to provide early years support – have closed throughout the country since 2010, when the Conservatives took office.

The Council insists children’s services will still be available – just no longer run in “expensive and sometimes difficult to reach buildings”, which will instead be taken over by nurseries, schools and others. But that was not the result in Dulverton, which made this change four years ago.

Once a hub of parent clubs and support sessions, Dulverton children’s centre services have been “really reduced”, according to Becky Fry, who has a four-year-old son and one-year-old daughter. She relied on the weekly baby group, health visitors and reading time with her first child. “I don’t know what I would have done without it… I’ve struggled with my second one.” She works for a charity more than a 45-minute drive away from where she lives.

Dulverton’s library, a former green-fronted old ironmongers on the main square, is also under threat – nearly half of Somerset’s libraries face closure as the council consults on making them community- or volunteer-supported instead of council-run, or replacing them with mobile libraries. In the consultation, Dulverton library has a “no change” option, but locals are gloomy about its fate.

The town even lost its only bank two years ago; now a mobile bank stops by every Tuesday for 45 minutes in the late morning.

“By taking all that away, you’re not encouraging any young, working families to live and stay in the area. You’re literally just pushing them out,” says Richard Eales, the park ranger.

The woodland idyll masks widespread deprivation. West Somerset has the worst social mobility in England, performing particularly poorly on services for early years and working-age people. Job opportunities are scarce and public transport poor – the word “bus” provokes bitter laughter from people I meet.

Wages are low but retirees moving in, and holidaymakers with second homes for shooting and fishing on Exmoor, inflate property prices. West Somerset has Britain’s highest percentage of people aged 65 and over, and its population is dwindling.

“We’re not a theme park or just a place for people to retire to,” says the Somerset county councillor for Dulverton, Conservative Frances Nicholson. “Working families should be supported because they will move out.”

Rural deprivation is so great that the government has made west Somerset an “opportunities area”: an area to focus funds on improving outcomes for children.

For residents like Eales, however, it’s already too late. “It almost feels like [living here] you are being pushed beyond the realms of our reach,” he says. “It’s austerity, isn’t it?”

Somerset is solid Tory territory. With the exception of Bath, all its constituencies are held by Conservative MPs – the best-known being Jacob Rees-Mogg (whose six children are unlikely to bear the brunt of Sure Start cuts).

Yet, because of the “Corbyn effect”, west Somerset’s local Labour Party membership has more than tripled in the last two years. “No Labour politicians ever come to this area,” leader Kathrine See tells me. “We’ve got to tackle these communities; we can’t just ignore them. For one, it’s not responsible because that’s not part of the [Labour slogan] ‘For the many’, and two, we need their votes… It’s a poor area for the majority.”

Local Tories also feel neglected by their Westminster counterparts. “I’m just wondering where our society’s going, and what can be done? And are our policymakers really in touch with the grassroots?” asks the chairman of West Somerset Council, Bruce Heywood, who has represented Dulverton since 2011, when I meet him for a coffee outside the grey stone-walled Tantivy Café. To avoid bankruptcy his council is merging with neighbouring Taunton Deane. “It is a chipping away of what has been established over years that causes problems in our environment… when they turn the tap off funding.”

The former mayor of Dulverton and fellow district councillor Nick Thwaites warns that the “slow creep” of austerity – “when the pillars the town depends on are removed one by one” – is difficult to reverse. This is why, he says, “you have to fight each removal as if it is much bigger than it first appears”.

https://www.newstatesman.com/politics/uk/2018/04/crumbling-britain-how-austerity-hollowing-out-heart-tory-somerset