Government tax avoidance measures fail to bring in avoided tax

“A crackdown on offshore tax cheats has only recovered about a third of the £1bn that the government had predicted, according to estimates.

Figures from HM Revenue & Customs suggest that a series of measures to tackle offshore tax evasion will only bring in £349m a year – £650m a year less than had been hoped for.

Other measures aimed at closing tax avoidance loopholes have also failed to generate the revenues that had been expected, undermining assurances from ministers that were made following the Paradise Papers exposé.

Paradise Papers: Davos panel calls for global corporate tax reform
The figure appears in a list of updated estimates provided by HMRC to the independent Office for Budget Responsibility over the last two years and released under a freedom of information request by the Labour party.

The shadow chancellor, John McDonnell, said these figures exposed “the utter failure” of the government to ensure the super-rich and big corporations were paying their fair share in tax.

“This could be just the tip of the iceberg,” he said. McDonnell said that after the Paradise Papers revelations last year, the government had been quick to promise action but slow to deliver on it. “Now they have been shown to not even deliver on what they originally promise,” he said.

Measures have been launched to tackle the use of offshore accounts to hide money from HMRC, including agreements with Switzerland, Liechtenstein and other low-tax regimes to recover unpaid tax.

In total, these measures were forecast to bring in an extra £997m a year to the Treasury. However, a new forecast in September 2017, after most of the measures had closed, downgraded that figure to £349m a year.

Labour says a total of 28 anti-avoidance measures introduced under the coalition and Conservative government were bringing in less than expected, and that the gap between the tax take originally expected from them and the revised forecasts totalled £2.1bn, or 25%.

Measures that are now expected to raise less than originally forecast include a package of moves to tackle base-erosion and profit-shifting, where companies artificially move profits to locations with low tax rates.

These, which included new taxes on diverted profits and royalties, were expected to bring in a total of £515m a year but are now expected to raise £175m less each year.

Accelerated payments, whereby investors in avoidance schemes are asked to pay any disputed tax upfront, were forecast to bring in £1.1bn annually, £154m more than the latest forecasts suggest has been raised.

Some measures have yielded more than the original forecasts predicted, and offset some of the £2.1bn difference. For instance, the sums raised through cracking down on the way company takeovers are structured have been revised up to 554% of the original forecast. Preventing companies from avoiding stamp duty by cancelling and reissuing shares during a takeover is forecast to make the Treasury £425m a year against an original figure of £65m.

McDonnell said the downwards revision of other forecasts showed the Conservatives were dragging their feet on tax avoidance. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/04/tax-abuse-crackdown-only-third-expected-1bn-freedom-information

Has the NHS already been privatised? Of course it has!

People are confused when the Government says “The NHS has not been privatised” thinking: “Well, it’s still free so it can’t be private”. THIS IS WHAT THE GOVERNMENT WANTS YOU TO THINK. The reality is that many services have already been privatised. So, why don’t we pay for them? WE DO! The private companies (eg Virgin, which already has more than £1 billion of NHS contracts) charge the NHS for their services, adding on their cut for profits (directors salaries, perks and pensions) and their rewards to shareholders by way of dividends. This ADDS to the cost of the NHS which allows Jeremy Hunt to say we cannot afford it!

Of course we can’t if we are already paying private companies over the odds

And see the letter below this image:

For example:

Guardian letters:

“The problem with the King’s Fund’s latest analysis (NHS privatisation would be ‘political suicide’ says thinktank, theguardian.com, 1 February) is that it ignores the fact some privatisation has already taken place. Of course it would be madness for any government to hand over the whole NHS to insurance companies, or privatise it in the way that Margaret Thatcher privatised British Gas. There is not even a majority for this among Tory party members. But only a handful of people seriously believe that’s the plan: the private sector doesn’t want most of the NHS – care, complex care, treatment of chronic illness, most mental health services. No matter how wealthy you are, you can’t buy any private equivalent to NHS emergency services, maternity, or many others.

Instead private firms want to take over services that they see as potentially profitable – especially the provision of simple elective surgery – the bread and butter of Britain’s tiny private hospitals (average size 50 beds). But the lack of any public support for privatisation has not stopped commissioners giving contracts to Virgin and other private companies for work previously done by NHS trusts. This, by any reasonable definition, is privatisation. In 2015-16, 7.6% of NHS spending was on private providers.

Reshaping the law to allow this piecemeal privatisation was the aim of the Health and Social Care Act 2012, which compels CCGs to put services out to tender. The King’s Fund lends weight to disingenuous government denials that they have been privatising services. They would do better to endorse demands for the repeal of the 2012 act and the reinstatement of the NHS as a publicly owned and publicly provided service.
Dr John Lister
Co-chair, Keep Our NHS Public”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/04/risks-of-outsourcing-and-privatisation-laid-bare

“Two Freemasons’ lodges operating secretly at Westminster”

Expect to see a comment from Owl’s East Devon Freemason’s spokesperson on this one!

“Two Freemasons’ lodges set up for members of parliament and political journalists are continuing to operate secretly at Westminster, the Guardian has learned.

New Welcome Lodge, which recruits MPs, peers and parliamentary staff, and Gallery Lodge, established for members of the political press corps known as the lobby, both remain active, according to Freemasonry records.

A third lodge called the Alfred Robbins Lodge, which was also set up for journalists, also continues to meet regularly in London.

The identities of the members of these three lodges remain unknown outside the world of Freemasonry, however, and so discreet are the members of Gallery Lodge that few journalists working in the lobby appear to be aware of its existence.

One current member of New Welcome told the Guardian that its members keep Gallery Lodge masons at arm’s length, on the grounds that while they are fellow members of the brotherhood, they are still journalists, and “they wouldn’t want journalists listening to their conversations”.

David Staples, the chief executive of the United Grand Lodge of England (UGLE), the governing body for Freemasons in England and Wales, said there was no contradiction between the practice of journalism and membership of Freemasonry.

“Contrary to populist perception, being a Freemason helps those members in roles serving society in the broader sense, including journalists, politicians, policemen and lawyers, to be better in those jobs by encouraging them to act as better people themselves. Their membership is a positive for both them as individuals, and for society at large,” he said.

More Freemasons would declare their membership, he added, if they did not fear prejudice and discrimination: “There should be no conflict between an individual choosing whether to declare their membership or not with that individual’s ability to do their job well. But there is, because some choose to believe otherwise, and some of our detractors are doing so based on nothing other than blind prejudice.”

The disclosure that both political journalists and politicians are Freemasons comes after the outgoing chair of the Police Federation alleged that Freemasons were blocking reforms in policing and thwarting the progress of women and officers from black and minority ethnic communities.

After three years as the chair of the Police Federation, Steve White said: “I found that there were people who were fundamentally against any kind of change and any kind of progress, and they always happened to be Freemasons.”

The charge brought an angry denial from the UGLE. In a letter to the press, Staples said: “We are quietly proud that throughout history, when people have suffered discrimination both in public and social life, Freemasonry has welcomed them into our lodges as equals.” He added that many Freemasons chose to keep their membership secret in order to avoid being discriminated against.

At Westminster, MPs and peers are not obliged to declare their membership of the Freemasons, although the Commons authorities say they can disclose this information voluntarily on the registers of members’ and Lords’ financial interests. None currently do so.

Nor do any political journalists declare their membership of the Freemasons on the register of journalists’ interests, which is maintained by parliament.

The three lodges each meet four times a year at Freemasons’ Hall, the UGLE’s headquarters in Covent Garden, London.

The UGLE said Gallery Lodge currently has 45 members and Alfred Robbins Lodge – which is named after a former newspaperman and prominent mason – has 18 members.

“None of the members who have joined either of these two lodges since 2000 have their occupation recorded as journalist or anything obviously linked to the newspaper industry,” the spokesman said.

It is unclear how many of their members joined before that year, however, and UGLE will not identify the lodges’ members.

The Guardian understands past members of Gallery Lodge have included former journalists at the Times, the Daily Express, the Scotsman, and several Hansard reporters.

While the New Welcome lodge has about 30 to 40 members, the Guardian understands only about four of the current members are MPs, and that none are peers. Most of the members of the lodge are former MPs, parliamentary staff or police officers who have served at Westminster. MPs who are Freemasons are members of other lodges, however.

Although New Welcome lodge was set up following the 1926 general strike, to admit Labour politicians who had previously been refused entry to Freemasonry, the Guardian understands that none of its current members are Labour MPs.

Many are said to have left the Freemasons in the 1980s, fearing they would lose their seats if they were questioned about membership while reapplying for the Labour party’s nomination in between general elections, which had become a requirement at the start of that decade.

At least one Labour MP is said to have left New Welcome Lodge when facing reselection at this time, and arranged for his membership to be held in abeyance so that he could be quietly readmitted once he knew his parliamentary seat was secure.”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/04/two-freemasons-lodges-operating-secretly-at-westminster

“Why money still rules the roost in British Politics” and why the very, very few control the not so many in the Tory Party

Electoral Reform Society:

If ever there was a story which revealed the disproportionate influence exerted by big party donors, it was the on the front page of The Times on Tuesday.

The article set out what has been described as a ‘donors’ revolt’ over Theresa May’s leadership, based on an account of a fundraising event held last week.

At the event it was reported that “about a quarter of the 50 donors present were said to have demanded her resignation.”

The story reflects the nature of power in the UK: a handful of wealthy individuals can buy access to government Ministers – and with it, the ability to ensure their views are heard on the front pages.

What distinguishes these individuals from most other people, of course, is the fact they are bankrolling the Conservative Party led by Mrs May.

But should that fact alone – particularly when very few people can afford to make significant donations to a political party – entitle them to have such a domineering voice on their leader’s credentials?

In a 21st century democracy, the answer should be a clear ‘no’. The Prime Minister and the government should be accountable to all citizens – regardless of how much money they have.

But the problem of big money in politics is not a new one. Senior politicians from a variety of different parties have been held to ransom by those with the deepest pockets – a fact which has led to scandal after scandal over the years: from Labour’s ‘cash for honours’ crisis, to the Liberal Democrats being caught arranging a private meeting with the Chief Secretary to the Treasury for a potentially illegal donor.

As we noted in our report, ‘Deal or No Deal: How to Put an End to Party Funding Scandals’, there is an expectation that comes with donations. The Committee on Standards in Public Life interviewed several of the major party donors in 2011, throwing up some uncomfortable if wholly logical conclusions about the relationship between donations, policy influence and honors.

Donor Stuart Wheeler suggested it was ‘natural’ and unobjectionable that donors would gain policy influence: “If it is influence in the sense of being able to put their views on what is best for the country and how the country should be run, I do not see any objection to that.”

House of Lords appointee Michael Farmer suggested that many donors would expect an honour in return for their finance:

“You cannot get away from the fact that the word ‘peerage’ is connected to large donations, so if you are giving a large donation there is a part of your mind somewhere that every now and then thinks about it”

The problem with the UK’s big-donor culture, even when the donations are legitimate, is that it gives those with the most money a disproportionately large say.

The story this week concerned just a handful of very rich individuals. Compare that to the 12.4 million people who voted for the Conservative party at last year’s election.

It highlights once again that the system of party funding in this country is broken and skews politics away from ordinary people who should be at the forefront of politicians’ minds when they are making decisions.

The ability to purchase political influence is damaging to trust and confidence in our democratic institutions. It is time we had a fairer model for funding our politics – one which put voters at the centre.”

https://www.electoral-reform.org.uk/why-money-still-rules-the-roost-in-british-politics/

Virgin – propped up by British Government

“As Britain’s best-known businessman, seen by millions as a buccaneering role model, Sir Richard Branson has produced bookshelves of advice about “relying on yourself”, creating a “nation of go-getters” and “standing on your own feet”.

As he wrote in his self-help manual, Screw It, Let’s Do It: “If you want milk, don’t sit in the middle of the field in the hope that the cow will back up to you.” This year, however, is likely to be one where Branson gets most of his British milk from the taxpayer teat.

Using recently published company accounts and regulatory disclosures, The Sunday Times has established that Branson’s Virgin Group is on course to join what critics call the “corporate welfare state” — with the majority of its UK revenues coming from work subsidised, or wholly funded, by the public purse.

More than 80% of revenues at Virgin UK Holdings, Branson’s main holding company in Britain, already come from operations dependent on public funding, mainly rail and the NHS, the accounts show.

Branson’s companies received £320m from taxpayers in 2016 for running public services. Some £262m of this was from the health service or local councils for medical and social care through his Virgin Care business. Then there was a net government subsidy of £58m for Virgin’s share of the East and West Coast rail franchises, a joint ventures with Stagecoach.

Virgin UK Holdings does not own all Branson’s British businesses, such as his stakes in Virgin Money and Virgin Atlantic, his biggest cash cow in 2016. And the tycoon — who lives mostly in his tax haven personal island of Necker in the Caribbean — now has substantial international interests, not least his space venture.

Nonetheless, in the UK, the balance of his income is shifting more towards public services. In a deal likely to be completed this year, Branson will slash his interest in Virgin Atlantic, from 51% to 20%. He has already cut his stake in Virgin Money to 35%.

Even in 2016, with the airline still on board, healthcare and rail accounted for about 40% of Virgin’s total UK revenues. By comparison, the now-collapsed Carillion earned about 45% of its UK income from the government that year.

Virgin Care has more or less doubled its NHS work in the past two years. If that growth were to continue, it is easy to imagine that more than half of Virgin’s UK revenues could be derived from public sector work — particularly in light of the likely reduction of Branson’s airline holding.

“Branson poses as a champion of competition, but has always been reliant on getting government-granted contracts and monopolies.” said Branson’s biographer, Tom Bower. “But as that sort of work grows, so does the risk that political controversy over it contaminates the brand loyalty, which is Virgin’s only real asset.”

Branson’s recent deal to escape up to £200m in future payments to the Treasury for his 10% share of the East Coast rail franchise drew that sort of political flak. Lord (Andrew) Adonis, a former transport secretary and chairman of the National Infrastructure Commission, called it “scandalous” — though Virgin points out that it has lost money on East Coast, and paid a £2m premium to the government last year.

On the far more lucrative West Coast line, Virgin’s 51% share generated revenues of £1.1bn, profits of £34m and it paid £7.5m in tax in 2016-17. The franchise also netted Branson £60m in state subsidy that year — and almost £1bn since 2008, according to the Office of Rail and Road (ORR) regulator.

Virgin says most of this money was paid to Network Rail to maintain the tracks its trains use. The ORR, however, defines it as a subsidy to Virgin, since the operator would otherwise have to pay Network Rail itself.

West Coast is much improved under Virgin — though Branson cannot claim all the credit, as he often does. The £9bn upgrade, allowing today’s faster, more frequent trains, was funded by further Treasury cash.

Despite all the subsidies, Virgin now charges £338 for a standard peak return from London to Manchester, up 50% since 2008. The morning peak period, during which such fares apply, finishes as late as 10.40am, while the evening peak for most English destinations starts at 3.01pm.

However, it is the NHS that has the potential to cause Branson the greatest political grief. Tellingly, in the 400 NHS and social care contracts now run by Virgin, its branding is extremely low-key. The Care Quality Commission, the health regulator, strongly praises many of its services. Yet middle England may not always agree. In Somerset and Yorkshire, where Virgin runs NHS contracts, there have been controversies about care standards. In Surrey, Virgin was criticised for suing the NHS, winning a multimillion-pound settlement. There is also controversy about tax. Branson’s core health and social care company, Virgin Care, made more than £8m profit in the year to March 2017. Its accounts, published on December 28, show a liability for corporation tax of £1.6m.

Across the web of companies that make up the Virgin Care group, however, “administrative expenses” of £31m were set against profits, reducing tax liabilities to nil. Virgin Care claims on its website that “we have always paid our UK taxes in full and will continue to do so”. In fact, it has never paid any UK tax — because, it says, it has never made a profit.

Virgin declined to respond to detailed questions about what the administrative expenses were, though it said they were less than in the public NHS.

Branson says Virgin Care has “saved the NHS and local authorities millions” and insists he does “not want or intend to profit personally from the NHS”. If and when a dividend was taken from the work, a spokesman said, all the money would be invested back into NHS services.

Virgin said last night that it had “many successful businesses across the world”, and continued to “start and invest in new ventures”. It said the publicly funded businesses accounted for a smaller share of profits than of revenues, and pointed out that it might no longer run West Coast after 2019, when its current deal ends, though it is bidding for a 30% share in the new franchise.

Branson’s trajectory in Britain seems clear, however. While Virgin’s name still adorns many UK businesses, it no longer owns most of them, including Virgin Mobile, Virgin Media and Virgin Radio, instead licensing other companies to use the Virgin brand. “Virgin is increasingly living off the state,” said Bower.

Yet even as it does so, new questions are being asked over the model, and even the very principle, of private involvement in public services. With the collapse of Carillion, the rise of the hard left, and a scathing National Audit Office verdict on the Private Finance Initiative, could Branson, for once, have misjudged a trend?”

Source: Sunday Times (paywall)

Scrutiny and Privatisation don’t go together like a horse and carriage

“A leading Capita shareholder has attacked the embattled outsourcing giant for flouting corporate governance rules, and claimed its current crisis was “preventable”.

Royal London Asset Management said it had been “privately raising concerns about Capita’s weak governance for a number of years” and had repeatedly voted against pay deals.

Shares in Capita crashed 55% last week after its new chief executive Jon Lewis said it would need a £700m rights issue, suspended its dividend and launched a fire sale of assets. Lewis, the former chief executive of oil services company Amec Foster Wheeler, plans to simplify the outsourcing behemoth, which has contracts ranging from army recruitment to Tesco Bank’s call centres.

The broadside by Royal London, a 0.4% shareholder, said the new board must “ensure that Capita does not repeat the mistakes of the past”. Royal London’s corporate governance chief, Ashley Hamilton Claxton, said: “Until recently, Capita’s board flouted one of the basic rules of the corporate governance code, with a small board primarily comprised of management insiders. The result was a board that lacked the independent spirit to rigorously assess whether the company was making the right long-term decisions.”

She added that Capita’s pay policy “left something to be desired” — citing big losses in 2013 that were excluded from the calculations on executives’ pay.”

Source: Sunday Times (paywall)

Who fights for the NHS in East Devon? Your Independent councillors!

At today’s Save Our Hospital Services demo in Exeter today. East Devon Alliance and Claire Wright make their mark but not an East Devon Tory (including our two East Devon MPs) to be seen!

East Devon Alliance DCC Councillor Martin Shaw

East Devon Alliance EDDC Councillor Cathy Gardner

DCC Independent Councillor Claire Wright

East Devon Alliance Councillors Marianne Rixson with East Devon Alliance Councillor Cathy Gardner

One of the many interviews the independent councillors did on the day.

HM Revenue and Customs caught in their own privatisation tax trap!

“…
HM Revenue & Customs

In 2001 HMRC signed a £3.3bn contract with Mapeley, a little-known private equity firm. The deal involved handing over the ownership and management of 591 tax offices, including the freehold of 132 of them, to an offshore company managed by Mapeley, then based in the Cayman Islands.

Mapeley won the contract largely because it underbid UK rivals, which had to include VAT in their calculations. The Cayman Island connection gave Mapeley a 20% advantage.

The irony of the tax authority signing a deal with an avoidance vehicle was lost on the government and the then chancellor Gordon Brown. It banked the £370m from Mapeley and pressed ahead.

Civil servants were unaware at the time that 15 years later they would be managing around 20 change programmes, several of which involve reorganising the Mapeley offices. The NAO has repeatedly criticised the deal as expensive and said it should be ditched when it runs out in 2021, despite Mapeley, which is now a major commercial landlord across Britain, shifting back to the UK.

HMRC says legal advice at the time blocked it from excluding firms based in tax havens and that this is no longer the case. From 2021 it plans to move to “direct leases for property and smaller, more flexible facilities management contracts that we can control more easily”.”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/03/three-public-private-contracts-pfi-good-bad-baffling

“Hundreds protest NHS crisis in Exeter as councillor warns: ‘Only Derriford and RD&E will be left’ “

Brilliant coverage of today’s NHS demo in Exeter including interviews with EDDC East Devon Alliance councillor Cathy Gardner, DCC East Devon Alliance councillor Martin Shaw and DCC Independent Councillor Claire Wright making excellent points about the destruction of our NHS.

https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/hundreds-protest-nhs-crisis-exeter-1162119

“TORY MP STANDS UP FOR LABOUR POLICY PLAN IN SPAT WITH TORY MINISTER”

“A Tory minister has been taken to task for juvenile political point scoring by an unlikely source – a senior Tory MP.

The incredible spat between two of the Tories’ most prolific tweeters broke out when Treasury Secretary Liz Truss took a cheap shot at a housing policy being considered by Labour.

Under the plan, which is revealed on the front page of today’s Guardian, landowners would no longer be allowed to inflate the price of land sold for property development:

[There then follows a nasty Twitter spat between Tories Liz Truss and Nick Boles where Bowles sticks up for Corbyn!!!]

Truss responded by trying to tar the attempt to get more council homes built as some kind of Stalinist land grab.

But Nick Boles, himself a former planning minister, was having none of it.

The pair continued to spar until Truss brought the embarrassing blue-on-blue battle to a curt conclusion.

The clash comes after Boles made clear his dissatisfaction with abject lack of policy ideas coming from the Government and his party. …

The Conservative family is not a happy one.

As for Truss’ objections to Labour’s policy, we were reminded of a policy included in the last budget by her boss, Chancellor Philip Hammond.

Hammond announced an anti-land banking policy which the Tories had described as “Mugabe-style expropriation” when Labour floated the idea.

Liz Truss will be defending this “sinister confiscation” before you know it…

https://politicalscrapbook.net/2018/02/tory-mp-stands-up-for-labour-policy-plan-in-spat-with-tory-minister/

“Fix the NHS: Protesters rally in London [and Exeter] to call for government action

“Health workers, activists and unions are marching in central London on Saturday to protest against government inaction over the NHS winter crisis.

Hospitals have been overwhelmed in recent weeks by a surge in admissions that has led to delays of up to 12 hours on emergency wards, patients left on trollies for hours and thousands of patients forced to wait in ambulances before receiving urgent care.

Two pressure groups, the People’s Assembly and Health Campaigns Together, have organised the rally to call on the government to plug funding and resource gaps in the health service. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/feb/03/fix-the-nhs-protesters-rally-in-london-to-call-for-government-action

“Dozens of academy schools need bailouts from taxpayers”

“Operators of dozens of academy schools are having to rely on emergency handouts from the taxpayer as a result of mounting deficits that threaten to put some out of business.

In the latest sign of the financial pressures now on the nation’s schools, the auditors of one operator that oversees 21 schools raised concerns over its ability to keep operating after it posted a £2.5m loss last year.

The revelations follow an investigation in last week’s Observer that found that more than half of the biggest multi-academy chains (MATs) had issued warnings about funding, citing pay, staffing levels, building maintenance and mounting deficits. It has now emerged that some smaller trusts have had to ask for cash advances from the state to stay afloat.

AdvertisementHide
The Birmingham-based Academy Transformation Trust (ATT), which received funding from the government of £59m last year and operates 21 schools educating nearly 12,000 pupils, is one of a number of chains that appear to be relying on future government handouts to keep functioning.

In a note on its 2016-17 annual accounts, the ATT trustees admit: “While the trust’s balance sheet remains solvent, the net position of income funds shows the trust to have a deficit of £2.513m. The trust is also forecasting a further reduction in funds in 2017-18.

“The trust has been taking action to address this position and is in advanced discussion with the Education [and] Skills Funding Agency [ESFA] to provide an advance to ensure appropriate cashflow during 2017-18 and beyond.”

An auditor adds: “A material uncertainty exists that may cast significant doubt on the trust’s ability to continue as a going concern.” It states that ATT’s financial position had been “worsening throughout the year”, and that its board of trustees had not been sufficiently aware of this because of “failings in the trust’s financial reporting and forecasting procedures”.

The Rodillian Multi Academy Trust, in West Yorkshire, disclosed that it also needs a “cash advance … to be able to operate effectively”. The trust, which operates four schools, reported a deficit of £1.5m last year.

“In common with all state-funded schools the [trust] faces considerable pressures on funding,” its accounts state. “The trust took on two schools that had low pupil numbers, were not financially strong and needed a managed staff reduction to address the inherited over-staffing.

“Managing the cash flow month to month is difficult and … the level of creditors has become uncomfortably high. A business case is being prepared to request a repayable cash advance from the ESFA. The ESFA acknowledge that the trust requires a cash advance to be able to operate effectively.”

Andy Goulty, Rodillian’s chief executive, told the Observer that he had come under pressure to take on new schools and had suffered as a result. “It was missionary work really to go in to a community like my own and turn it round. It has been turned around. However, in hindsight we probably wouldn’t take it on. As things have got tighter over the years, we have not had the resource. The government keeps saying that more money is going into schools. Well, yes, it is, but we are paying out more in pensions, national insurance. What is being spent on the kids is less and less.”

London-based Chapel Street Community Schools Trust, which runs five free schools and two academies, saw it post a deficit of £1.6m and state that it is depending on the government providing cash “beyond the normal funding arrangements”.

Its accounts say: “The trust places considerable reliance on continued government funding. This is likely to remain unchanged in terms of the funding per pupil rate, despite pay, pension and general inflation pressures. This increases the risk of deficits.”

Plymouth CAST is predicting that more than 90% of its schools would be in deficit by next year. Its auditors stated: “A material uncertainty exists that may cast significant doubt on the academy trust’s ability to continue as a going concern.” The trust reported a £1.54m deficit for the year. It referred itself to the body that oversees school funding last year.

ATT said that a recovery plan has been developed “which shows the trust returning to in-year surplus in 2018-19 and overall surplus no later than 2021 … The trust [had] over £3m in the bank at 31 August 2017.” Rodillian said it had a plan to deliver a surplus in 2017-18 and a significant surplus in 2018-19.

Chapel Street trust said it had experienced some historical financial difficulties related to setting up new schools, but had good educational outcomes. It said its accounts made clear it was on “a sounder financial footing”.

The Department for Education says that school funding is rising from almost £41bn in 2017-18 to £43.5bn in 2019-20, and that every school will receive an increase in funding through the national funding formula this year.”

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2018/feb/03/academies-schools-deficit-bailout

“Autocratic top-down management” fails NHS and leads to mediocrity

“Autocratic management is a leading cause of poor NHS care, according to the compiler of a European health service league table that ranks Britain 15th.

The UK trails Slovakia and Portugal while the best performers such as the Netherlands and Switzerland pull away, according to the Euro Health Consumer Index. Treatment is Britain is mediocre and there is an “absence of real excellence” in the NHS, the report concludes. Only Ireland does worse on accessibility measures such as availability of same-day GP appointments, access to specialists and waits for routine surgery.

The findings come after a global study this week found cancer survival in Britain still lagged well behind the best in the world.

Arne Björnberg, who compiles the Euro Health Consumer Index, said: “Cancer survival rates are one of the prime examples of NHS mediocrity.”

More money is needed to improve care, according to a study that finds a strong correlation between treatment results and how much countries spend on health.

However, Professor Björnberg said that the most urgent lesson the NHS could learn from other countries was about the corrosive effects of an “autocratic top-down management culture”. He said: “As a Scandinavian what strikes you when you visit the UK is British management is extremely autocratic. Managing 1.5 million using a top-down method doesn’t work very well. If you go and ask a secretary or a receptionist anything out of the routine in Scandinavia, the most negative response would be: ‘I’ll see what I can do’. But in the UK they will say: ‘I’ll have to talk to my manager’. Subordinate staff are not allowed to use their brains in the UK and managing a professional organisation like healthcare like that is not a good idea.”

The Netherlands has consistently topped the rankings, which some have attributed to a system of competing insurance companies. However, Professor Björnberg said that the main lesson to be learnt from the Dutch was not about market forces but the need to put doctors in charge and force them to take account of patients’ views.

“If you have intelligent people and make them talk to customers frequently, that is a good idea,” he said.

“You have 1.5 million intelligent and dedicated people working for [the NHS]. Liberate the medical profession and put politicians and amateurs at arm’s length.”

[Autocratic top-down] NHS bosses dismissed the findings, preferring an index compiled by the US-based Commonwealth Fund, which ranks Britain top of 11 global health systems. The NHS scores well on measures such as equal access, but ranks tenth at keeping people alive.”

Source Times (paywall)

Virgin: rewarded for failure

Virgin already run children’s services, many GO’s surgeries and other former public services in Devon. They will no doubt bid as aggressively as usual for more Devon health care services when Devon gets its (Un)Accountable (Non)Care (Non-scrutable) System which will allow wholesale privatisation of our NHS.

“Virgin Trains will be handed a lucrative new contract to run services on the west coast main line despite serious criticism of its owners’ handling of the east coast franchise.

The Department for Transport is expected on Monday to award the company a new deal to operate the line between London and Scotland for another two years. The contract will take the form of a “direct award”, when the incumbent is handed a short-term deal without other train operators being able to bid.

The announcement could prove awkward for Chris Grayling, the transport secretary, who has been criticised for his handling of Virgin’s east coast franchise. It is being scrapped in 2020, three years early, after the company overestimated passenger numbers and suffered a revenue shortfall. It is feared that the franchise could collapse even sooner, forcing the government to rewrite the contract or even renationalise the line.

The confirmation of the west coast deal could be seen as a “reward for failure” by critics of Britain’s privatised railway. The west coast is the country’s most profitable rail line, making £51 million for Virgin — a joint venture between Sir Richard Branson’s Virgin Group and Stagecoach — in 2016-17.

It will also fuel concerns over the franchising system, which has suffered a shortage of bidders in recent years. A third of rail franchises are let on a direct award basis. However, the DfT is preparing to mount a staunch defence of the deal, insisting that it merely represents confirmation of a contract announced more than a year ago, before the east coast fiasco.

Sources said that the west coast was well run, with the franchise delivering more than £200 million a year in premium payments to the government, reversing a previous position when it made a £75 million net loss.

It was also claimed that comparisons with the east coast were unfair. The east coast is 90 per cent run by Stagecoach. However, the west is 51 per cent owned by Sir Richard’s company, with Stagecoach holding a 49 per cent stake.

Stephen Joseph, executive director of the Campaign for Better Transport, said: “There is a need for a fundamental review of franchising. We can’t keep the railway running on direct awards. We need long-term thinking.”

The existing west coast franchise had been due to end in April. The government announced more than a year ago that a direct award would be made, allowing Virgin to run the line up to April next year. At that point, a new franchise was expected to be created — “the west coast partnership” — to run both west coast trains and HS2 services when the high-speed line is built in 2026.

However, it is believed that Virgin will now continue to run the line for a further year — up to April 2020 — delaying the start of the long-term west coast partnership by 12 months.

The direct award is expected to require Virgin to improve its passenger satisfaction ratings, extend free wifi in carriages, introduce passenger compensation for trains that are at least 15 minutes late and accommodate work needed to prepare for HS2.

A DfT spokesman said: “As set out in November 2016, we intend to award a short-term contract to operate services on the west coast main line until the start of the new west coast partnership, which will run services on the west coast line and shape the future of HS2.”

Source: Times (paywall)

Struggling council may have to sell its new HQ …

Bet that caused a few palpitations and raised blood pressure in East Devon! But it’s Northamptonshire which has banned all but essential services spending.

“A cash-strapped local authority has imposed emergency spending controls as it faces “severe financial challenges”.

The section 114 notice bans all new expenditure at Northamptonshire County Council, with the exception of statutory services for protecting vulnerable people.

Last month the government said an inspector would look into allegations of financial failings at the authority.

It is believed to be the first such notice issued in more than 20 years…

The Conservative-led council announced in December that it was looking to increase council tax by almost 5% as it sought to make savings of £34.3m.
At the time, council leaders claimed they were facing huge demand for services, as well as cuts in government grants.

It was revealed in January the authority was considering selling its new £53m headquarters, which officially opened in October.

One Angel Square was designed to save money by closing 12 offices and making best use of a new office block. …”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-northamptonshire-42920716

“Protest in Exeter [tomorrow, Saturday 11 am] will call on Government to ‘fix our NHS’ “

“Tomorrow (Saturday) will be a national day of action and Save Our Hospital Services Devon will be among those calling for:

 An immediate cash injection to relieve the crisis facing the NHS, which has seen ‘unacceptable’ waiting times in A&E, delays admitting and discharging patients, deaths on trolleys and in waiting ambulances, and the cancellation of all routine operations.

 An end to the closure of hospitals, wards and beds in Devon.

 No imposition of Accountable Care contracts in Devon or any other part of the country, but a return to a fully public, fully funded, fully accountable NHS, free at the point of use.

 Fair pay for NHS workers and the restoration of bursaries for student nurses.

The protest will begin in Princesshay Square at 11am tomorrow (Saturday).”

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/protest-in-exeter-will-call-on-government-to-fix-our-nhs-1-5379581

“Labour plans to make landowners sell to state for fraction of [development] value

Won’t that put the cat amongst the East Devon land-holding fat pigeons! And to add insult to land-owning injury – some top Tories agree!!!

“… Landowners currently sell at a price that factors in the dramatic increase in value planning consent is granted. It means a hectare of agricultural land worth around £20,000 can sell for closer to £2m if it is zoned for housing.

Labour believes this is slowing down housebuilding by dramatically increasing costs. It is planning a new English Sovereign Land Trust with powers to buy sites at closer to the lower price.

This would be enabled by a change in the 1961 Land Compensation Act so the state could compulsorily purchase land at a price that excluded the potential for future planning consent.

Healey’s analysis suggests that it would cut the cost of building 100,000 council houses a year by almost £10bn to around £16bn.

… With the “hope value” removed from the price of land, the cost of building a two-bed flat in Wandsworth, south-west London, would be cut from £380,000 to £250,000, in Chelmsford it would fall from £210,000 to £130,000 and in Tamworth in the West Midlands, where land values are lower, it would drop from £150,000 to £130,000.

“Rather than letting private landowners benefit from this windfall gain – and making everyone else pay for it – enabling public acquisition of land at nearer pre-planning-permission value would mean cheaper land which could help fund cheaper housing,” said Healey.

The proposal is expected to face strong opposition from landowners, including many pension fund investors, who would risk losing considerable sums on what they expected to receive. Savills, the property consultancy, warned that owners might launch legal challenges claiming the move infringed their property rights.

Companies known as strategic landowners make money for investors by buying agricultural land that may be needed for future housing at low prices, securing planning consent and selling it on for significant profits. They include Legal & General, which boasts “a strategic land portfolio of 3,550 acres stretching from Luton to Cardiff”.

… A similar policy has been advocated by some leading Conservatives, including the former planning minister Nick Boles. In a sign of growing political consensus, he said the huge windfalls gained by some landowners were inequitable and that the current system of capturing the uplift in land value through section 106 agreements was “incredibly inefficient”, because private developers could afford to outwit planners with expensive lawyers and consultants.

“There will be mass opposition, but there aren’t that many landowners and they are not a huge voting block,” Boles said. “Not all Conservatives would naturally feel comfortable with this but I have been struck by the positive reaction.”

Speaking earlier this week Javid indicated he would like to change the system. He said: “I think it’s right that the state takes a portion of that uplift to support local infrastructure and development.” …

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/01/labour-plans-landowners-sell-state-fraction-value

“Number of council homes sold off under Right to Buy increases five-fold in six years after Tories lift cap”

“The rapid loss of social housing because of the Right to Buy scheme has been laid bare after new figures revealed more than five times more homes are being sold now than in 2012.

Councils said Right to Buy had become “unsustainable” after it emerged the sell-off of council homes has drastically accelerated in the past few years, while Labour labelled the figures “indefensible”.

More than £3.5bn of public money has gone to help almost 60,000 tenants buy their home at a hefty discount in the past six years, prompting local councils to warn of a “fire sale” of low-cost homes.

Town-hall leaders said Right to Buy had become “unsustainable” and could not be continued unless councils are given more powers to build replacement homes. …

In April 2012, Conservatives ministers “revamped” Right to Buy and raised the maximum discount on a property to £75,000 (it has since increased further, to more than £100,000, in some parts of the country). Since then, the number of homes sold off has increased by 409 per cent, from 2,638 in 2011-12 to 13,416 in 2016-17.

This has come at a rising cost to the taxpayer, with the average discount given to tenants having more than doubled since 2012, from £26,690 to £61,810 – a 132 per cent increase.

It means tenants are able to buy their home at less than half the market value – with the average discount now at 43 per cent of the property’s value, up from 25 per cent in 2012.

In total, nearly 58,000 council homes have been privatised under Right to Buy in the past six years alone.

The mass sell-off comes despite the number of social homes in England having hit record lows and council house waiting lists reaching ten years in some parts of the country. …”

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/right-to-buy-council-homes-sold-off-private-landlords-rent-tory-cap-a8189881.html

That by pass for Axminster wasn’t always flavour of the month!

How times change! Following on from the effusive self-congratulations of EDDC for securing £10 million towards an Axminster by-pass, here is a news item from 2012, published in the now defunct “Sidmouth Independent News” from a time when an Axminster by-pass was thought by EDDC to be a very, very bad idea:

“Trinity House department store in Axminster has had scaffolding ripped off it by a passing lorry. Story here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-20431396

It was sheer luck that no-one was hurt in the accident in this busy main street through the town.

We welcomed people from Axminster to the Stroll to the Knowle on 3 November 2012. When consulted about the Local Plan the majority of those responding preferred to have major development to the east of the town (where there is a potential site) because it could fund a much-wanted and much-needed bypass of the town centre.

EDDC preferred to allow development by EDBF member Axminster Carpets on a site to the north of the town, despite objections to flood risk and traffic management problems. Then Planning supremo Kate Little said that the northern site was preferable as the eastern site was unlikely to result in a bypass, as any road through a new development would not probably be qualified to be called a by-pass.

A judicial review is taking place about this decision – taken whilst the new Local Plan was in its first consultation period and not included in the old Local Plan – early next month. The High Court has taken the rare step of issuing a “protective costs order” in this case where, if local people do lose the case, they will only have to pay a small part of the company’s legal costs.”

https://sidmouthindependentnews.wordpress.com/page/204/?pages-list