“NHS warns of ‘dangerous’ beds shortage this winter”

“Patients could die this winter because the NHS is alarmingly unprepared to deal with the surge of people who fall ill during the cold weather, hospital bosses warn today.

NHS Providers, which represents hospital trusts in England, fears lives could be lost because patients are being forced to spend long periods waiting in ambulances outside A&E, or on trolleys.

Hospitals are so “dangerously short” of beds that they may be unable to cope with the coming winter, Chris Hopson, the organisation’s chief executive, told the Observer. They will struggle even more than last winter – when chaotic scenes led the Red Cross to call the situation “a humanitarian crisis” – because a £1bn government initiative intended to free 2,000-3,000 beds by September has failed, he added.

That scheme aimed to reduce the proportion of beds occupied by patients who are fit to be discharged but cannot leave – called “delayed transfers of care” – to 3.5% of all beds by this month. It was 5.6% of beds at the end of 2016 and still 5.2% at the end of June, NHS figures show.

“That 3.5% target is going to be missed,” Hopson said. “Therefore, hospitals this winter will still be too full of people whom we can’t discharge, even though they are medically fit to leave, because of problems with social care. Failure to do so leaves us dangerously short of capacity.

“That means that it could be even worse than last year, when there were far too many patients waiting more than 12 hours on a trolley or in the back of an ambulance to be seen. We were running much greater levels of risk to patient safety than we had had for at least a decade and we don’t want to see that level of risk again.”

Hopson added: “If that does happen, it could result in patients having dreadful experiences. If people are ill, they need to be seen quickly or their condition gets worse or ultimately they die prematurely. Waiting unduly long can mean patients getting much iller than they should be and dying when they don’t need to.”

A new NHS Providers report details its concerns about winter.

In an online commentary for the Observer, Hopson writes that, despite efforts by the NHS nationally to plan for the cold spell ahead, “NHS trusts are worried that they do not have enough staff, beds and other services to manage the risk to patient safety this winter”.

The warning comes as some hospitals continue to struggle with the number of patients seeking help, even though winter is months away. Last Thursday the NHS trust which runs Royal Stoke University Hospital and County Hospital in Stafford asked people to stay away from their A&E units, except in a genuine emergency, to help reduce the “extreme pressures” on the units.

“Currently, both sites are experiencing the type of demand usually only see in the middle of winter, so people are experiencing long waits and our staff are exceptionally busy. Please only attend A&E Departments for anything classed as an emergency including choking, chest pain, loss of consciousness, severe blood loss, broken bones, difficulty breathing, deep wounds or a suspected stroke,” it said.

On Friday, Gavin Boyle, the chief executive of Derby Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, wrote in his blog: “Without wanting to come over all Game of Thrones, winter is coming! For many working in our hospitals, it feels as though winter never went away and indeed August was one of our busiest months for emergency admissions.”

Also last week, University Hospitals of Leicester Trust put in place plans to improve its poor performance against the four-hour A&E target before the start of winter. These include increasing the number of doctors working overnight in A&E, a daily “safety huddle” of senior doctors, ensuring full staffing and managers monitoring how quickly the emergency department is processing patients.

Two trust bosses said that their hospitals are already facing major problems, especially because of staff shortages. “The first quarter of this year [2017-18] has been as challenging as any I can remember; there has been no let-up. Acuity, attendances and admissions have all stayed high,” said Nick Hulme, chief executive of Colchester Hospital University Foundation NHS Trust. “Our major concern going into this winter is staffing. Going into August we are 50 junior doctors short on our rotas across the hospital. Every day is a constant struggle for junior doctors and registered nurses.”

John Lawlor, his counterpart at the Northumberland, Tyne and Wear Mental Health Trust, said itsinability to arrange packages of care to enable patients to be discharged, resulting in beds being occupied unnecessarily, was “a significant concern. [In addition] pressures on staffing, especially in psychiatry, are beginning to impact on services and these will become more intense until the new people trained begin to come on stream over the next five to 10 years.”

The health service regulator NHS Improvement warned that hospitals had experienced “extremely high levels of bed occupancy” during April, May and June, despite those usually being the service’s quietest months. The regulator said it doubted that the plan for hospitals to return to treating the required 95% of A&E patients within four hours by the end of 2017 would succeed.

NHS England admitted that this winter would be tough, and revealed that hospitals were already planning to open at least 3,000 beds, which should help manage demand and minimise the risks to patients.

“The NHS will face challenges this winter, as it does every year, but NHS Providers have stated that winter planning is more advanced than it was last year and – as they argue – special attention is being paid to areas where pressures are likely to be greatest,” said Pauline Philip, NHSE’s national urgent and emergency care director.

“We are currently in the process of assessing how many extra beds trusts are planning to open over winter and early returns indicate that this will be more than 3,000. This is something we will continue to review on the basis of evidence rather than arbitrary estimates. If the expectations for reduced delayed transfers of care outlined by the government are achieved, this would free up a further 2,000 to 3,000 beds over the winter period, on top of the extra 3,000 plus beds that hospitals now say they’re going to open.”

The Department of Health was more upbeat about winter. “Thanks to the hard work and dedication of staff, alongside record levels of funding to ease pressure on A&E departments, the NHS has prepared for winter more this year than ever before, ensuring patients continue to receive safe and efficient care as demand increases,” a spokesperson said.

“As new expert analysis shows, spending on the NHS is in line with other European countries, and once again our health service was independently judged to be the best and most efficient health system in the world.”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/sep/02/nhs-warns-of-dangerous-beds-shortage-this-winter

“MPs declare sports and bookies as most common donors”

“Sports and betting companies top the list of donors treating MPs to gifts and hospitality.

The Ladbrokes Coral group appeared 15 times in the register of members’ interests, more than any other donor.

Out of 187 donations from UK sources registered by MPs, 58 were from the world of sport. A further 19 were from betting companies.
Ladbrokes Coral said it wanted MPs to take decisions “from a position of knowledge”.

But campaigners for tighter rules on gambling said companies could use hospitality to lobby MPs not to change rules on fixed odds betting terminals.

MPs are required to declare any gifts, benefits and hospitality over a value of £300. The latest register was published on 29 August and most declarations date from the beginning of 2016 to July 2017.

The Ladbrokes Coral Group accounted for 15 entries including trips to Ascot, Doncaster and Cheltenham races, the Community Shield at Wembley and dinner at the Conservative Party conference.

Altogether, the group of companies donated £7,475-worth of hospitality to four MPs, Conservatives Philip Davies (eight occasions – totalling £3,685), Laurence Robertson (four occasions -£2,550) and Thérèse Coffey (twice – £890) and Labour’s Conor McGinn (once – £350).

The total does not include any gifts or hospitality worth less than £300 as MPs do not have to declare this.

ITV appeared eight times and Channel 4 was mentioned five times. BBC Northern Ireland appears once. …”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-41027964

Surprise! Developer-led planning hasn’t worked!

The current planning system – based on the National Planning Policy Framework – which was put together mostly by housing developers appointed by the Cameron government – was unfit for purpose from Day 1. It allowed inappropriate developments to spring up all over the country, and is still allowing them in the many places which don’t have a Local Plan and 5-year land supply (a spurious and pointless measurement tool).

Now yet another go at reforming it, this time by planners themselves.

Developers will again want to muscle in in the act and bully their way into totally influencing policy. However, nothing works without the will to put people before profit.

But all too late for East Devon where the damage has been done for generations.

A root-and-branch review of the English planning system aims to see how it can be made ‘fairer, better resourced and capable of tackling the major challenges which confront the nation’.

The review, led by former Labour housing and planning minister Nick Raynsford, has been motivated by “widespread concerns” that the planning process is unable to deliver places that successfully balance the needs of economy, environment and community well-being.

Housing and climate change were identified as particular areas where the current planing system was failing to meet the needs of communities.
Launching a call for evidence, Raynsford, who is also president of the Town and Country Planning Association, said: “More than ever we need a planning system which commands the confidence of the public and delivers outcomes of which we can feel proud.

“After too many years of piecemeal changes and tinkering with the system, we need to go back to first principles and seek to develop a practical blueprint for the future of planning in England. That is the objective of this review.”

The review is kicking off with a formal call for evidence and the promise of a series of ‘engagement events’ over the next 18 months – with the first in York on 11 July.

Overall, the Raynsford review has three aims:

To engage constructively all those interested in the built environment about how we can deliver better placemaking through a fairer and more effective planning system.
To set out a positive agenda following the outcomes of the general election and planning hiatus.
To set out a new vision for planning in England and rebuild trust in the planning process by communicating with the public as well as professionals.

Raynsford is being supported in his work by a ‘task force’ that includes:

Lord Kerslake, former head of the civil service and chair of Peabody
Kate Henderson, chief executive of the TCPA
Anna Rose, incoming head of the Planning Advisory Service
Yvonne Rydin, professor of planning, environment and public policy at the Bartlett School
Chris Shepley, former chief planning inspector for England and Wales

Tom Fyans, interim chief executive of the Campaign to Protect Rural England
Task force member – and Planner columnist – Chris Shepley said: “There has been a period of rapid change in the planning system but this has not always been accompanied by a strategy or vision for its future. We need a longer-term focus in order to produce a strong and stable planning system.”
The RTPI said it supported the review.

Planning policy officer Harry Burchill said: “The effective and efficient functioning of the planning system is the cornerstone of a fair and prosperous society. The RTPI welcomes this review and is pleased to contribute its policy and research expertise which demonstrates how better planning can contribute to a range of challenges, notably the housing crisis.”

https://www.theplanner.co.uk/news/raynsford-review-aims-for-%E2%80%98fairer%E2%80%99-planning-system

“Council calls for new powers to discipline councillors”

Relax Diviani and Randall-Johnson – it isn’t EDDC or DCC and never will be while you and your mates are in charge!

“Thurrock Council has written to the Communities Secretary Sajid Javid to request legislation for a new ‘Right to Recall’ councillors in the event of significant conduct or ethical breach, similar to that put in place for Members of Parliament by the Recall of MPs Act 2015.

The council said that it is also looking into the possibility of introducing its own recall scheme and has asked its monitoring officer to investigate ways that this could be established without new legislation.

Deputy Leader, Cllr Shane Hebb said: “The council’s Monitoring Officer has been looking into the legalities of such a change, and I’m pleased there were many voices across the council chamber who were in favour of a higher form of accountability.

“If changes were to be implemented then, should a councillor fall foul of an agreed set of criteria – like not attending meetings, conviction of a crime or breaching the members code of conduct – voters would have the choice to recall their representative and go to the ballot box to choose another candidate.

“As councillors, we are effectively immune from our residents calling time on any bad practices until a future election. It is the belief of this council that significant lapses of judgement and behaviour do warrant sanction far sooner in some instances, and that our bosses – the electorate – should have a say in calling time on such elected representatives.”

The Localism Act 2011 removed many of the sanctions available to councils to discipline misbehaving members and a number of surveys of monitoring officers since then have found that the standards regime introduced by the act is considered inadequate to deal with code of conduct breaches.”

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php

Councils to be £1 BILLION out-of-pocket from planning fee undercharging

NO, PLEASE don’t allow local authorities to set their own fees! We might get £1,000 per sq ft for a small family home improvement and nothing at all for a 500 home development, so beloved are big developers by EDDC!

“The government has failed to deliver on a promise to allow councils to increase planning application fees, leaving councils facing a £1bn bill, the Local Government Association has said.

The umbrella-body believed councils would spend some £1bn above this fee income to cover the cost of developers’ planning applications by 2022 unless the government acted.

Last February’s housing white paper Fixing our Broken Housing Market promised councils a 20% uplift in fees from July 2017 if they invested this in their planning department.

A further 20% was offered at an unspecified time to councils delivering against commitments for new homes in their area.

The LGA said the July increase had failed to materialise and it was unclear when it would.

Longer term, councils want powers to set planning fees locally as they see fit, as developers are charged fees for the cost of handling applications but these are set nationally and may not reflect the real cost to a council. …”

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2017/08/governments-failed-planning-fees-promise-leaves-councils-ps1bn-bill

Draft Exmouth Neighbourhood Plan ready for consultation

“The Exmouth Neighbourhood Plan consultation document follows nearly two years of preparation and consultation, both with community groups and members of the public.

Now, the public are being given the chance to have their say again, with the document to be published online on Friday, September 1. People will be able to comment online for one month, and also at an event at Ocean, Queen’s Drive, on Tuesday, September 19.” …

http://www.exmouthjournal.co.uk/news/draft-vision-for-exmouth-is-revealed-1-5175293

Retirement housing plans dismissed due to ‘overage’ row

This is a REALLY important decision as it establishes principles that surely MUST form a part of PegasusLife plans for the Knowle. And it will also apply to other developments.

Or has EDDC conveniently agreed to overlook this with PegasusLife – whose massively greater number of flats at eye-wateringly higher prices will give a MUCH greater profit than Green Close?

“A developer’s appeal over its bid to demolish a Sidmouth care home and build 36 sheltered housing apartments for the elderly has been dismissed.

Churchill Retirement Living took its case to the Planning Inspectorate after East Devon District Council (EDDC) failed to decide on its application within the allotted time.

Its plans, for the site of the closed 23-bed former Green Close care home, were approved in November subject to a £41,000 contribution towards ‘affordable’ housing.

But the two sides were subsequently unable to agree on an ‘overage’ clause that would have seen Churchill share half of any profits with EDDC that exceed the former’s current forecasts.

Planning inspector Thomas Bristow said: “I accept the proposal would be beneficial in resulting in additional sheltered housing accommodation in East Devon, in supporting employment during construction, and as future occupants would make use of nearby services and facilities.

“I have also taken account of the various reports submitted by the appellants related to housing older people, which highlight the importance of housing provision for an ageing provision.

“However, the support accorded in general terms to enabling housing delivery is not at the expense of ensuring that all development makes appropriate provision for affordable housing.

“Moreover, as there is no dispute over whether the council are presently able to demonstrate a five-year housing land supply, the development proposed cannot be said to be necessary to meet housing requirements as they stand in East Devon.”

Town councillors had slammed Churchill’s £41,000 offer towards off-site ‘affordable’ housing as an ‘insult’ to Sidmouth – claiming the developer stood ‘make millions’ from the development.

EDDC accepted Churchill’s viability assessment showing it could make no more than the ‘relatively modest contribution’, but tried to impose the overage clause in case its profits exceeded expectations.

Mr Bristow found in the council’s favour and refused planning permission.

Churchill acquired the site from Green Close owner Devon County Council subject to planning permission.

A spokesman for the firm said it is considering its options.

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/developer-s-appeal-to-build-36-flats-in-sidmouth-dismissed-1-5175982

Progressive politics – voters want it, the two main political parties don’t

“Whispers of collaboration waft through the air. Rumours of a new political entity emerging into the light. Stories of politicians ready to cast aside tribal instinct and join something new.

But that is quite enough about the political intrigue in Germany where, weeks before the general election, there is no doubt breathless discussion in the cafes near the Bundestag about who Angela Merkel may end up working with if she’s returned as chancellor again.

I talk of the occasional chat here, among those who describe themselves as forced to sleep on the political streets: homeless in the era of Brexit and Jeremy Corbyn.

Destitute, desperate and with a desire for something different, the story goes, they are smooching their way discreetly towards an immaculate political conception.

They are searching for the Anglo-Saxon equivalent of France’s En Marche, the miracle birth over the water.

President Emmanuel Macron built his own political kit car widget by widget, and, fuelled by the French electorate, drove it straight to the Elysee Palace.

So this political correspondent peeled himself away from the feverish summer squalls over the Big Ben bong ban, and instead made some inquiries.
‘Militant, muscular moderates’

One household name had already told me privately that they frequently passed colleagues from other parties in the corridors here, and thought that they had much more in common with them than plenty of their own supposed political brethren.

Another well-known politician told me of their desire to “create a home for those deeply politically engaged people who I call the ‘militant, muscular moderates'”.

“On the surface, there is the two-party system, but it is more complex than that,” I was told.

“There is a lot of voter churn – the electorate is soft and fluid.”
That’s Westminster speak for: “No-one’s quite sure what’s going on, so anything’s possible.” Possibly.

Look closely and what could be the embryonic beginnings of a new party are there.

There was what was called the Progressive Alliance at this year’s general election.

There were 42 seats across the UK where candidates broadly of the left stood aside with the intention of helping another candidate on the left beat the Conservatives.

In 38 of them, the Green Party didn’t put up a candidate. In two, the Liberal Democrats didn’t bother. And in one, the Women’s Equality Party didn’t. Not one Labour candidate stood aside. …”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-41096500

However, the article concludes that there is no taste amongst Tory and Labour MPs to tinker with the status quo.

Each side assuming they would lose power and votes to another party.

Councils have hands tied over secondary school place increases needed

“A potential shortage of school places looms ahead in secondary schools in England, councils are warning.

The Local Government Association says schools will be thousands of places short over the next few years as a population bulge moves up from primary.
It says schools in 12 councils will be over capacity by 2018, rising to nearly half of councils within five years.

But the Department for Education attacked the figures as “thoroughly misleading”.

This is the sixth year in a row that town hall bosses, who are responsible for ensuring sufficient places, have warned of a future squeeze.
This time, the LGA says schools could be nearly 8,000 places short by September 2018 and 125,000 short by 2022.

‘Real frustration’

The figures represent the difference between the predicted pupil numbers and the number of places presently available on the ground.

Councils say the problem is becoming more difficult for them deal with as they no longer have any influence over many of the schools that may need to expand.

Councils say the problem is becoming more difficult for them deal with as they no longer have any influence over many of the schools that may need to expand.

The surge in primary school pupils has seen councils help deliver an extra 600,000 places since 2010, but this was achieved by adding rooms and capacity to council primary schools.

At secondary level, two-thirds of schools are now academies which are independent of local authorities.

Councillor Richard Watts said: “It is not difficult to predict the number of kids who will need a place – you get 11 years’ notice – so there’s a real sense of frustration that there’s this intense pressure.
“Over the years, our powers to deal with the issue have reduced, and this creates a bigger problem.

“Given that most of secondary schools in the country are now academies, local government does not have the powers to require these schools to expand or to set up new schools themselves.”

Geoff Barton, general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders, said: “No-one can really claim that it’s a surprise.

“We have had the National Audit Office predicting these student numbers.
“The information was there, the planning should have been done.

“How have we ended up where we are?”

‘735,000 extra places’

The way forward was a collaborative approach between local authorities, academy chains and the regional schools commissioners overseeing academy standards, Mr Barton said.

A Department for Education spokesperson said: “Local authorities have a statutory duty to ensure that there is a school place available for every child.

“We have allocated £5.8bn of basic need funding between 2015 and 2020 to enable them to do this, and over 735,000 additional pupil places were created between 2010 and 2016.

“This money is given to councils based on their own estimates of the number of places they will need.”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-41110662

“Floral tributes laid as hundreds say farewell to Exmouth Fun Park”

Floral tributes were left inside the iconic swanboat and messages of thanks were left as a family run seafront Fun Park closed after more than 60 years tomorrow.

The Fun Park on Queen’s Drive, Exmouth, closed for the last time on Thursday ahead of major multi-million pound plans that East Devon District Council has to renovate the seafront.

Hundreds of people came out for one last ride on the pedalos and a round of crazy golf at the Fun Park.

A vigil was also held by Save Exmouth Seafront campaigners and floral tributes were presented to the Wright family who have run the Fun Park for more than four decades.

Unless a motion that an extraordinary meeting of East Devon District Council to be held on September 13 to discuss the closure of the businesses as part of the Queen’s Drive redevelopment is agreed to give the seafront businesses a chance of an eleventh-hour reprieve, the Exmouth Fun Park has now closed for good.

The Harbour View Café is set to follow the Fun Park in closing at the end of September while several long-standing businesses including DJ’s Diner, the Arnold Palmer/Jungle Fun site, and the model railway have already closed. … ”

http://www.devonlive.com/whats-on/family-kids/floral-tributes-laid-hundreds-say-408634

“The real villains in Harvey flood: urban sprawl and the politicians who allowed it”

Houston has quietly become [the USA’s] fourth largest and fastest-growing city, due in large part to cheap housing. But the latter has come at an exorbitant cost to its safety. The swamps and wetlands that once characterized Houston’s hinterland have been replaced with strip malls and suburban tract homes.

Those landscapes once served as a natural flood protection system for the city. Research shows that, if they hadn’t been filled and developed, Harvey’s impact would have been lessened. Sam Brody and his colleagues at Texas A&M University in Galveston have been predicting an event like this for nearly a decade. That their work went unheeded by Texas policymakers should not be forgotten.

Worse, a generation of civic leaders have completely deregulated Houston’s land development market. In that process, they helped build a far-flung network of poor neighborhoods on top of a swamp. In Houston, there is a simple truth: the poorer you are, the closer you live to a petrochemical plant and the likelier your home is to flood.

There will be an impulse to elide past the political choices that led us to this point. We shouldn’t allow our politicians to use the use Harvey’s victims as human shields by pronouncing that now is not the time for criticism or blame. There’s never been a more important time to understand the political machinations that led to Harvey’s destructiveness, and to do everything in our power to dismantle them. …

Coastal infrastructure is incredibly expensive to build and nearly impossible to maintain, especially when you realize that the maintenance is borne entirely by local governments – none of which have the financial or technical capacity to do so effectively.

Some have already begun to point to Holland, where the world’s most complex flood control system operates, and to proclaim that if the Dutch do it, so can the United States. This simply isn’t true.

The Netherlands has a much higher tax rate, giving it more resources per person to invest in its infrastructure. Dutch storms are also less intense and bring lower surge heights and less rainfall than their American counterparts.

For a lasting recovery, Houston will need to supplement whatever barrier system it builds with a broader, regional network of wetlands, retention ponds, and green infrastructure to restore the once-robust, natural flood protection lost to a half-century of urban sprawl.

Designers have been calling for such an approach since Ike made landfall. Houston should look to New York’s landscape architect-led recovery process as a model worthy of consideration.

A half-century of bad design choices and impotent planning led Houston to this crisis. Now, it’s up to a new generation of Houstonians to do what their predecessors could not – prepare the Magnolia City to rise up and meet its wetter future head on. …

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/aug/31/real-villains-harvey-flood-urban-sprawl

Warning bell on power-grab by Ministers excluding Parliament after Brexit

More than 70 charities, NGOs and trade unions have joined a formal alliance to scrutinise the “great repeal bill”, as major rights organisations such as Amnesty International, Liberty and Friends of the Earth say they are determined to halt a “power grab” by ministers.

Members of the alliance say it will be a platform to campaign for open and accountable lawmaking after the bill is presented. It will push for clear limits on the powers given to ministers by the bill and aim to ensure standards are maintained after the UK leaves the EU.

The alliance, which launched on Wednesday and is coordinated by Unlock Democracy, says it intends to scrutinise the legislation and offer legal and technical expertise from its members, who range from human rights lawyers to environmental scientists.

The European Union (withdrawal) bill will be the first major piece of Brexit legislation before the House of Commons, with its second reading next Thursday.

One of the most complex pieces of legislation in recent history, the bill ostensibly aims to transpose EU law on to the UK statute book via secondary legislation, which could then be gradually repealed or replaced as governments see fit.

Critics of the bill say it confers significant extra powers to ministers to make changes without parliamentary scrutiny, using so-called delegated powers.

Labour’s Hilary Benn, chair of the Brexit select committee, has previously suggested this could amount to a “blank legislative cheque”, although the government has insisted the powers will only be used to make technical corrections to make the laws translatable.

Concerns have been heightened because of the number of times ministers have used delegated powers to make highly controversial changes, including the so-called rape clause requiring women who have been raped to provide verification if they wish to claim tax credits for more than two children.

Lord Judge, the former lord chief justice, has been among those raising questions about the complexity of the repeal bill and its repercussions, calling Brexit “a legislative tsunami … the greatest challenge ever faced by our legislative processes”.

Funded by a range of charitable trusts including the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust and the Lloyds Bank Foundation, the alliance has a permanent member of staff in place to coordinate public campaigns, although it insists it is neutral on Brexit. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/aug/31/brexit-charities-join-forces-against-repeal-bill-power-grab-by-ministers

Tories funded by rich few, Labour by poorer many!

Tories funded by big donations from the (very, very rich) few, Labour funded by the (very, very much poorer) many!

“Labour generated 10 times more in party membership fees than the Tories in 2016

Labour received ten times more than the Tories in party membership fees in 2016 as the scale of the difference between the number of rank and file supporters for each was laid bare.

The Conservatives generated £1.5 million in membership fees last year while Labour coffers were boosted to the tune of £14.4 million, according to new figures published by the Electoral Commission.

Meanwhile, the Tories brought in £800,000 through membership in 2015 while the Labour figure was £9.5 million.

The size of the membership money gap between the two parties is likely to reignite speculation about the current size of the Tory party membership after previous claims that it may have dipped below 100,000.

Membership figures for the Conservatives have not been made available since 2013 when the party had about 150,000 paid up supporters.

That figure represented a sizeable reduction on the size of the membership during the 2005 leadership contest when it stood at a reported 253,000.

In stark contrast the most recent estimate of Labour Party membership from March of this year was 517,000.

The cost of standard membership of the Conservative Party costs £25 and £48 for Labour but both parties offer other, less costly membership packages for certain groups of people like young people and armed forces personnel.

The Conservative Party declined to comment on the current size of its membership.

A Labour Party spokeswoman said: “Labour is a mass membership party, proud to be funded by our members and working people.

“It is this broad funding base that makes us the party of ordinary working people, while the Tories increasingly rely on a small pool of super-rich donors.”

While Labour enjoys a huge financial advantage over the Tories on the issue of membership income, it is the Conservatives who are ahead when it comes to donations.

The Tories received almost £19 million in donations in 2016 while Labour received £14.7 million.

In 2015, a general election year, the Tories received about £32 million in donations compared to about £19 million for Labour.

Both Labour and the Tories spent less than what they generated in income in 2016.

Labour’s total income was just shy of £50 million with the party spending about £43 million while the Tories’ total income was just over £28 million with expenditure totalling just under £28 million.

The Liberal Democrats ranked third on the list of party expenditure, spending £7.7 million, followed by the SNP on about £6 million and Ukip with just shy of £3 million.

The SNP spent more than it brought in, recording income of just under £5 million.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/08/31/labour-generated-10-times-party-membership-fees-tories-2016/

Councillor calls for Randall-Johnson resignation

PRESS RELEASE

Devon County Council’s Health and Adult Care Scrutiny Chair, Councillor Sara Randall Johnson, should immediately consider her position following the stinging rebuke issued to her by the Council’s Standards Committee. The Council should also act to restore the credibility of Health Scrutiny, since its failure to fully scrutinise the removal community hospital beds in Honiton, Okehampton and Seaton has destroyed public confidence in its activities across a large swathe of Devon.

At its meeting on 29 August, minutes of which are published today, the Standards Committee agreed that while Cllr Randall Johnson had not broken the Members’ Code of Conduct, she should ‘be strongly reminded of the importance of the work of scrutiny committees – reinforcing the value of neutrality in scrutiny both generally and in calling the “health service” to account – and the need to be seen to be even handed and scrupulously fair, recognising that failure to do so may be perceived as a deliberate act.’

The call for a Scrutiny Chair to ‘be strongly reminded of the importance of the work’ of her committee, and of the value of neutrality and being seen to be even-handed and fair, is unprecedented and should lead Cllr Randall Johnson to immediately consider her position. There is no public confidence that she will lead the committee to carry out full and impartial scrutiny of NHS decision-making.

The Standards Committee also ‘accepts that the events of the Health and Adult Care Scrutiny Committee meeting on 25 July 2017 may not reflect well on individual Members or upon the Council as a whole, and further recognises that the perception gained by persons present at the meeting or subsequently viewing the webcast is not that which would have been desired’.

This stark acknowledgement of the damage done to Devon County Council’s reputation also requires early action by the Council to reassure the public that the Committee will do its job properly in future and protect the NHS in Devon.

The Scrutiny Committee ignored the views of local communities and their representatives and has allowed the CCG to get away with damaging cuts. The Council must now consider how to restore people’s faith that it will protect all our community hospitals in the future. I shall ensure that this is discussed when the Council meets on 5th October.

Martin Shaw
Independent East Devon Alliance County Councillor for Seaton & Colyton”

Scrutiny in Parliament: “party loyalty inhibits criticism and evidence-based reasoning”

Owl’s summary: From top to bottom – party loyalty trumps common sense. And we, the voters, pay the price.

The author’s summary:

“Conclusions

Where once Parliament lurked almost completely impotently on the sidelines of policy-making, recent revisionist accounts have ‘talked up’ MPs’ collective influence, with some justification.

Yet the Commons is still far from having the ‘full spectrum’ and decisive influence that democratic criteria suggest are needed.

Party loyalties inhibit criticisms and evidence-based reasoning.

Budgetary consideration is largely a joke.

And legacy procedural practices plus MPs’ traditionalist attachment to inefficient and ineffective ways of working (like the witness system for select committees, instead of developing proper investigative staffs) have limited the legislature’s role, despite some positive recent developments.”

Vigil for Exmouth Fun Park – say farewell to the local family and their much-loved attraction 11 am – 8 pm today

Today is the last day today for the Fun Park complex run by the local Wright family in Exmouth, who must make way for EDDC’s vision of the future – a no-doubt very expensive water sports centre and other coastal clone businesses.

If you will miss this attraction and the local family who run it, people are being asked to please turn up with thank you’s, mementoes etc for a Wright family tribute today.

Save Exmouth Seafront will be there from 11 to 8 pm tonight when the doors finally shut.

Its contents will be auctioned on Friday:

http://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/exmouth-fun-park-contents-set-403954

“Nine in 10 MPs don’t believe UK’s social care system is fit for purpose”

And Owl thinks the other 1 in 10 are self-serving idiots – one of whom is Jeremy Hunt.

“Only 10 per cent believe pensioners needing help to stay living in their own homes are well served, found the poll of 101 English parliamentarians.

Just 13 per cent of Labour MPs and 35 per cent of Conservative MPs say social care services in their constituencies are up to scratch.

“Confidence that the social care system can deal with the UK’s ageing population has virtually evaporated among parliamentarians,” said Janet Morrison, chief executive of Independent Age, which carried out the research.

“The crisis in social care was front and centre in the election earlier this year, and it is clear from this poll that there is an overwhelming desire from politicians on all sides for the Government to work towards a cross-party consensus on a solution.”

Former Lib Dem health minister in the coalition government Norman Lamb said: “The health and care system in England is creaking at the seams.

“An unprecedented number of older people need support in later life but are finding high-quality care is hard to come by.

“Without lasting reform, the most vulnerable frail and elderly people are at real risk of falling through the gaps and not getting the support they expect and deserve.”

The Government has pledged an extra £2bn for social care over the next few years but it is only one-off funding which reduces each year.

Vital services caring for elderly and disabled people still face an annual £2.3bn funding gap by 2020, which will continue to grow, according to the Local Government Association.

Izzi Seccombe, chairwoman of the LGA’s community wellbeing board, said: “It’s encouraging to see so many MPs across all political parties recognising the need for action to find a sustainable solution to the adult social care funding crisis.”

Margaret Willcox, of the Association of Directors of Adult Social Services, said: “Older and disabled people and their families need and deserve high quality, reliable and personal care.

“For this to happen, and with MPs returning to Parliament next week, government needs to address adult social care as a priority so it can be future-proofed for people who will continue to need care and support in increasing numbers.”

The poll of more than 2,000 British adults also found that many under-estimate the cost of social care.

On average, UK adults estimate that residential care would cost £549 a week – when in reality it costs on average £866 for a place in a nursing home, the Centre said.

Meanwhile, another poll carried out by carehome.co.uk found that four in 10 of care home residents do not receive regular visits from friends and family.

A total of 1,154 care home owners, managers and staff were asked to estimate the percentage of residents that do not receive regular visits, with 42 per cent being the average figure given.

A Department of Health spokeswoman said: “This Government is absolutely committed to improving social care in this country, which is why we have provided an additional £2bn for the sector, introduced tougher inspections to keep driving up standards and committed to consult on the future of social care to ensure sustainability in the long term.”

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/847814/MPs-dont-believe-UKs-social-care-system-fit-purpose

Ambulance delays – a matter of life and death – underfunding blamed

“Almost two patients die a month on average after failings by the ambulance service, including delays or a failure to recognise the severity of symptoms, a review of coroners’ reports has found.

Coroners in England and Wales have written to ambulance services or call handlers 86 times since July 2013 warning them that they need to make changes to prevent future deaths.

Forty-eight of the warnings related to ambulance delays or problems with call handling, according to the review by Minh Alexander, a former whistleblower who now campaigns on patient safety. She said the volume of reports suggested a “significant decline in ambulance safety in recent years”.

She added: “Action is needed to rectify underfunding, related workforce and skill mix issues, and pressures on the whole NHS that spill on to ambulance services.”

Coroners have a duty to write a report under regulation 28 of the Coroners (Investigations) Regulations 2013 if it appears there is a risk of other deaths occurring in similar circumstances. Dr Alexander, a psychiatrist who raised concerns about patient deaths, produced her report by analysing section 28 reports published by the chief coroner.

A number of the reports highlight delays caused by slow handovers at A&E departments, echoing warnings from the National Audit Office earlier this year. In many cases the delay was not found to have caused the deaths but coroners were sufficiently concerned by what they heard at inquest to warn ambulance service bosses that delays could be fatal in the future.

In April, Gilva Tisshaw, assistant coroner for Brighton and Hove, wrote to South East Coast ambulance service following the death of Ronald William Bennett, warning of “serious delays in ambulances arriving at the scene of an incident as a consequence of ambulance crews being delayed at the accident and emergency department”.

There were also a number of cases involving call handlers without medical training and their computer programmes failing to recognise the severity of a situation.

In June, Elizabeth Earland, senior coroner for the Exeter and Great Devon district, wrote to South Western ambulance service after the death of Colin James Sluman, 68, who had a burst varicose vein. He called an ambulance at 1.36am, but bled to death before an ambulance arrived at 3.03am.

Dr Earland said the protocol followed by call handlers, on which they were “completely reliant”, did not recognise reports of dizziness in a patient on their own “as important triggers for a rapid response”.

An ambulance service spokeswoman said the trust had taken action to address the concerns.

Martin Flaherty, managing director of the Association of Ambulance Chief Executives, said ambulance services took coroners’ reports “extremely seriously” and would make changes in response where possible.

In 2016 English ambulances handled 10.7 million emergency calls.

Case study

Grant Benson, 21, died in a fire following a car accident in August 2014 after making a 999 call. Andrew Tweddle, senior coroner for County Durham and Darlington, wrote to the Yorkshire ambulance service after the event. He said: “It is clear from listening to the recording how frantic the driver became as the fire began and took hold.”

The car came off the road near Barnard Castle, County Durham, but the call handler at the ambulance service was based in Wakefield. She and two colleagues failed to pinpoint the crash location so an ambulance could be dispatched.

The inquest heard that it was not possible to transfer responsibility for calls between emergency services, and one ambulance service could not send a vehicle from another. Emergency services attended only after a further call had been made by a passer-by.

A Yorkshire ambulance service spokeswoman said it had “taken steps to review local practice.”

Source: The Times, pay wall

Young Tory activists caught discussing ‘gassing chavs’ and ‘shooting peasants’ in leaked WhatsApp group

“Young Conservative activists joked about “gassing chavs” and “shooting peasants” in a string of disturbing WhatsApp messages.

The conversation, which has now been leaked, took place in a group chat described as a “professional discussion board” for activists communicating about how to help the Tories win the next election.

The revelation comes as a new Tory-supporting youth group, called Activate, was launched to try to engage young people in politics in a similar way to Momentum, the left-wing Labour campaign organisation. However, the group’s social media launch was widely ridiculed for its overuse of hashtags and memes.

Guido Fawkes, which published the leaked messages, said the WhatsApp group was used as a “precursor” to the Activate group.

During the conversation, one member refers to an event as a “fine opportunity to observe the spice homo chav”.

Another immediately replies: “And gas them all.”

The first activist then jokes that he or she is “gonna run some medical experiments on them” before the second adds: “We could use them as substitutes for animals when testing.”

As the conversation continues, the pair make a string of further offensive comments about poor people.

The first suggests “experiments” could be conducted “to see why they are so good at producing despite living rough”.

Realising the direction the chat has taken, he adds: “Okay we gotta be careful otherwise this is turning [in]to a Nazi chat.”

Undeterred, the second person continues: “Vermin often populate at high rates…But seriously, chavs are an actual problem”.

As other young Tory activists join in the troubling conversation, talk turns to “solutions” for dealing with “chavs”.

Suggestions include “chavocide”, “turn the Isle of Wight into a super prison”, “shooting peasants” and “compulsory birth control on chavs”.

The back-and-forth is only stopped when one member tells his allies: “We don’t take the mickey out of the poor.” Another threatens to kick people out of the group “if this continues”.

A third then adds: “This is supposed to be a professional discussion board about how we coordinate for the next election. It is not a place to gossip or make rather silly jokes.”

With impressive foresight, he or she then suggests the “dodgy chatter in here” could end up on the Guido Fawkes blog, damaging the group and its objectives. …”

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/tories-gassing-chavs-whatsapp-messages-group-chat-activate-members-leaked-a7921086.html

Owl was right! The tiniest, infinitesimaly small tap on Randall-Johnson’s wrist!

From the blog of East Devon Alliance Devon County Councillor Martin Shaw:

“Sara Randall Johnson exonerated of breach of rules but reminded of ‘the need to be seen to be even handed and scrupulously fair, recognising that failure to do so may be perceived as a deliberate act’

I’m posting extracts from the minutes of Devon County Council’s Standards Committee yesterday, concerning the allegations about Cllr Sara Randall Johnson’s Chairmanship of the Health Scrutiny Committee’s special meeting about the Seaton, Honiton and Okehampton hospital beds – mostly without comment, because I haven’t yet had time to fully absorb them or to decide with colleagues how to respond. One brief comment at the end, though …

The resolution, unanimously agreed, states

(a) that the Investigating Officer’s Report be acknowledged and endorsed as an exhaustive and thorough piece of work;

(b) that the Committee finds that the allegations are not proven and that there has not been any breach of the Code of Conduct or that they disclose any sufficiently serious potential breach that might warrant punitive action or sanction or that the subject member failed to apply one or more of the Principles of Public Life;

(c) that there is no evidence to support any allegation that the subject member failed to adhere to the Code of Conduct or had failed to treat others with respect or had failed to act in the public interest or had acted improperly or did not have regard to the relevant facts before taking part in any decision making process as alleged, specifically, in relation to paragraphs 4 and 5(a), (c), (d), (g) and (h) of the Code and that that complaints cannot therefore be upheld;

(d) that, notwithstanding the above, the Committee accepts that the events of the Health and Adult Care Scrutiny Committee meeting on 25 July 2017 may not reflect well on individual Members or upon the Council as a whole, and further recognises that the perception gained by persons present at the meeting or subsequently viewing the webcast is not that which would have been desired: Group Leaders should therefore be asked to remind Members of the need to conduct themselves appropriately and respectfully at all times;

(e) that, additionally, the subject member be strongly reminded of the importance of the work of scrutiny committees – reinforcing the value of neutrality in scrutiny both generally and in calling the ‘health service’ to account – and the need to be seen to be even handed and scrupulously fair, recognising that failure to do so may be perceived as a deliberate act; the difference between perception and reality being not easily countered;

(f) that in light also of the evident lack of awareness of some Members of the procedures to be followed at meetings, further training be offered (i) to Members on the rules of debate including procedures relating to the moving of motions and amendments and voting at committee meetings and to remind them that assistance was available through the Council’s Democratic Services & Scrutiny Secretariat to help them in ensuring consideration of any matter by a Committee and in drafting motions or amendments and (ii) to Chairmen and Vice-Chairmen of Scrutiny Committees, generally, relating to the management of those procedures at meetings;

(g) that Members be also reminded of the need to ensure microphones are switched on and used particularly when meetings are webcast and that Officers examine the potential within the current audio system to ensure that Members’ microphones are switched on remotely, if necessary, to ensure that their contributions are heard and recorded on the webcast; [This would appear to relate to the fact that Paul Diviani’s comments cannot be heard on the webcast]

(h) that, additionally, the Procedures Committee be asked at its next meeting to ensure the wording of the Council’s Constitution in relation to the appointment and membership of Scrutiny Committees is accurate and consistent throughout and reflects the provisions of the law and that the presentation of information about such appointments at the Annual Meeting of the Council is similarly made clearer in future; and

(i) that complainants be advised that any complaint over the conduct of the Health and Adult Care Scrutiny Committee’s Co-opted Member cannot be dealt with by the County Council and that as that Member was currently an East Devon District Councillor any such complaints should be referred to East Devon District Council’s Monitoring Officer.

Additional comments from the Investigating Officer about the Committee’s ‘scrutiny’ of the CCG’s proposal:

‘In relation to concerns that the subject member did not guide or direct Committee Members sufficiently robustly to discuss the relevant issues set out in the papers before that Committee or upon which representations had been made direct to Members, the Investigating Officer recognised that the subject member had been at pains to allow all parties present and able to speak with the Clinical Commissioning Group’s representatives, public speakers and local Members attending under Standing Orders addressing the Committee first and speaking on any aspect of the situation as they saw fit. Thereafter Members of the Scrutiny Committee were invited to speak – without restriction as to subject or time – to enable them to raise any issues they may have wished so to do and enable an informed discussion/debate: only then coming to a view, having first heard all the arguments.

‘It was felt to be entirely reasonable to have assumed that Members of the Committee had read and digested the information before and that it was for Members themselves to refer or raise in debate and discussion any specific issues they felt were necessary or worthy of so doing. The Investigating Officer was of the view that it would be wrong for anyone to assume that there had been no consideration of the issues highlighted in the Report CS/17/23 circulated at the 25 July meeting simply because Members had chosen not to speak specifically to any of those points.’

COUNCILLOR SHAW’S COMMENT:

My comment – no one said ‘there had been no consideration of the issues highlighted in the Report CS/17/23 circulated at the 25 July meeting simply because Members had chosen not to speak specifically to any of those points.’ What we said, and I still say very strongly, is that there was not proper consideration, let alone scrutiny.

The full minutes, which will be posted on the DCC website shortly, are here: Standards Committee 29 August 2017 “

Sara Randall Johnson exonerated of breach of rules but reminded of ‘the need to be seen to be even handed and scrupulously fair, recognising that failure to do so may be perceived as a deliberate act’