Claire Wright’s report on the shameful behaviour of DCC Health Scrutiny Committee Tories

“The Conservatives on Devon County Council’s health and adult care scrutiny committee on Tuesday, torpedoed local people’s views and any possibility of a referral to the Secretary of State for Health for a decision to close 71 community hospital beds.

I will keep this blog post short and instead post three articles that explain things just as well as I could have explained them.
Suffice to say that I am deeply disappointed.

Not just with the behaviour of chair, Sara Randall Johnson, who appeared to do her utmost to prevent any referral, both at the previous meeting last month and at Tuesday’s meeting.

But also with the attitude of the majority of the Conservative group, who used a variety of ill-informed views and remarks, to justify their determination not to refer, refusing to hear or see any member of the public’s distress, frustration and disbelief at the proceedings.

The chair’s attitude made me angry and led to a protracted row where I repeatedly asked her why she had allowed a proposal to be made and seconded at the very start of the meeting by her conservative colleague, Rufus Gilbert, NOT to refer to the Secretary of State for Health, when I already had a proposal that I had lodged with her and the two officers, before the meeting.

I had been indicating to speak since the start of the meeting, yet, Cllr Randall Johnson chose to call four councillors before me.

When I was finally called to speak I challenged her on why she had not made my proposal, which she had a copy of in front of her, known to the committee at the start of the meeting, which is the usual practice.

Cllr Gilbert’s seconded proposal before questions or the debate had even started had nullified my proposal, which was why I was so angry.

Cllr Randall Johnson admitted that it was her decision not make my proposal known to the committee and her decision on who is called to speak.

When they did what they did at Tuesday’s health scrutiny meeting, the Conservatives betrayed thousands of local people.

As I said in my final speech, local people had written letters, organised petitions, replied to public consultations, attended meetings, spoken at meetings, attended demonstrations, some had even spent significant sums of money on a legal challenge.

Time after time, month after month, the committee has asked questions which have not been properly answered on issues such as evidence that it will work, the staffing required, the finances, care of the dying. Local GPs are up in arms, staff have objected… yet the Conservative group knew best.

The vote was agonisingly close – six votes to seven, with two abstentions. All those who voted with Cllr Gilbert’s motion were conservative. Cllr Randall Johnson also voted with Cllr Gilbert – another unusual move at such a highly charged and significant meeting.

I am quite certain, that with a different approach by the chair, that the outcome would have been different. And local people’s views would have been respected and acted upon.

Councillors are elected by local people to represent their views.

Why was it so important to the chair and her colleagues that my proposal failed on Tuesday?

A whip at scrutiny committees, much least a legally constituted committee such as the health and adult care scrutiny committee of Devon County Council is strictly forbidden.

Yet to the members of the public present, who were repeatedly shouting “fix” it certainly appeared that way.

Since the meeting I have been inundated with messages from people who are disgusted at what happened.

Alongside two other councillors, I am seeking advice on what took place at Tuesday’s meeting.

The debate can be viewed on the webcast here – https://devoncc.public-i.tv/core/portal/webcast_interactive/293466

Seaton councillor, Cllr Martin Shaw, wrote an excellent account of the meeting here – https://seatonmatters.org/2017/07/26/the-health-scrutiny-committee-which-didnt-scrutinise/

My row with Cllr Randall Johnson has led to a local newspaper running a story about revenge… – see http://www.devonlive.com/tory-sara-randall-johnson-derails-claire-wright-s-health-campaign-six-years-after-election-defeat/story-30457493-detail/story.html”

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

“[Devon County] Council announces ‘harmful’ special needs funding cuts without consultation”

“Cuts which will affect children with special needs in Devon’s schools and colleges have been described as “harmful”.

On Wednesday – just two days before many schools break up for the summer holidays – Devon County Council (DCC) announced from September 1, significant funding cuts are being implemented for pupils with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) across Devon.

Devon Live asked DCC why the cuts have been made; why it was announced two days before the start of the summer holidays; why there was no consultation; what alternative provisions will be in place for the children affected by the cuts, if any, and how much the cuts will save the council.

“We therefore have to ensure that the high needs budget does not continue to overshoot. In consultation with headteachers and governors, a decision was made in the past week to concentrate our support from January 2018 on vulnerable children who have a statutory plan in place. All schools will be able to choose to apply for a statutory assessment of each child’s needs and no funding will be withdrawn until any non-statutory school plans have been reviewed. This means that by December 2018 we expect to have a single, transparent system of funding our most vulnerable children.”

The announcement has sparked anger not just because of the impact it will have on children’s education and job losses, but also because of the timing of it just before schools and colleges break up for six weeks.

In a letter sent to headteachers of all Devon mainstream schools by Dawn Stabb, DCC head of education and learning, it states that to date, Devon has been unique in providing a non-statutory route for schools and colleges to access SEND funding. However, due to increased need and entitlement it need to bring its high needs spend back within budget and that the continuation of the element three funding is “no longer sustainable”.

Hannah Rose, a teacher at Bradley Barton Primary School, said: “These changes will affect all children in all schools in Devon. Furthermore, there has been no consultation regarding these changes with any party, least of all those who matter most, the families of, and children with, special educational needs.

“The local authority’s duty is to, ‘when carrying out their functions, to support and involve the child and his or her parent, or the young person, and to have regard to their views, wishes and feelings’, as stated in the SEN code of practice, section 8.3.”

Hannah Rose is calling for the changes to be independently reviewed and, if necessary, legally challenged.

Dawn Stabb from DCC said: “The local authority recognises, following discussions at Schools Finance Group (SFG), that this has been a difficult but necessary decision if we are to avoid the budgetary challenges of last year. We ask for your support and understanding in implementing this new way of working to avoid ongoing significant overspend within the High Needs Block.”

https://www.consultationinstitute.org/consultation-news/council-announces-harmful-special-needs-funding-cuts-without-consultation/

Does our LEP have a plan B to replace European funding? And will it be a “functional economic area”?

“The Conservative manifesto earlier this year promised the government would use structural fund money that comes back to the UK following Brexit to create a UK “shared prosperity fund”.

However, deep concerns have been voiced about the replacement of EU structural funding. This week, Humber Local Enterprise Partnership chairman Lord Haskins aired doubts about the scale of the proposed fund.

He told the Hull Daily Mail that “so far, there is no indication it will match the sort of money we are currently getting from Europe”.

He added: “Long-term, I think we will have to start looking at other sources of funding for vital infrastructure work.”

The LGA also wants a new approach to distributing Westminster money that replaces EU regional aid, calling for a “single pot” for all domestic growth funding.

The association outlined three options for the future of funding currently sourced from the European Union. Its preferred method would see European Union structural funding, all other European funding streams and 70 UK funding streams supporting growth and regeneration pooled together.

The document said: “Under the single pot principle, local areas would be afforded maximum flexibility to target need and tailor provision, to stimulate growth in local areas and contribute to the national economy .”

The pot would be most effectively distributed to regional “functional economic areas” (FEAs) in England, and “appropriately identified” bodies in the devolved nations, the report said.

“In England, the FEAs could arguably follow the funding distribution geography of the current European Structural and Investment Funds (ESIF) programme,” the report added. It argued this would offer “much greater control over funding decisions , which would be devolved to all local areas.” …”

http://www.room151.co.uk/resources/billions-needed-to-match-eu-funding-for-local-communities-after-brexit/

Is money spent on free schools at expense of local authority schools good value?

Would a school under local authority governance have got to this level unnoticed?

“A free school in north Devon has been put in special measures after inspectors rated it “inadequate”.

Route 39 Academy at Higher Clovelly received the worst Ofsted rating in all four categories including “quality of teaching” and “pupils’ outcomes”.
The school opened in 2013 and has 131 pupils aged 11 to 18.

Route 39 has complained to Ofsted saying: “We strongly refute the judgement and the manner in which the inspection was handled.”

Ofsted’s report on its June visit said the school had not entered any pupils in Year 11 for exams and was “in breach of statutory requirements and the school’s own funding agreement”.

“Teaching has not prepared pupils in Year 11 well enough for the next stage of their education” and pupils’ progress across Key Stage 3 was “inadequate”, the report said. …”

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-devon-40730622

“Being ethical puts people off government service”

Owl remembers the case of disgraced ex-councillor Graham Brown and other scandals close to home:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/9920971/If-I-cant-get-planning-nobody-will-says-Devon-councillor-and-planning-consultant.html

and wonders if the world will ever change.

“White House counselor Kellyanne Conway on Thursday suggested that filling out financial disclosure forms and having them released to the public discourages qualified people from serving in government ― despite the fact that the procedure is a basic measure of transparency in government.

Appearing on “Fox & Friends,” Conway aimed to defend new White House communications director Anthony Scaramucci, after he falsely claimed that his financial disclosure form was leaked to Politico.

“There are so many qualified men and women who wanted to serve this president, this administration and their country who have been completely demoralized and completely, I think, disinclined to do so, based on the paperwork that we have to put forward, divesting assets, the different hoops you have to run through,” Conway said. “This White House is transparent and accountable, and we’ve all complied with those rules, but it has disincentivized good men and women. I hope it doesn’t disincentivize Anthony.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/kellyanne-conway-anthony-scaramucci-leaks_us_5979dfa0e4b02a4ebb734573

Who exactly does EDDC Leader Diviani represent? And who does he consult?

Questions at last night’s Full Council meeting at Knowle shed some light on this. Members of the public pointed out that Councillor Paul Diviani had voted against both his own EDDC council and public opinion, at Devon County Council just two days previously (25th July), by supporting the decision that ‘Your Future Care’ should not be referred to the Secretary of State.

The EDDC Leader’s vote on this occasion could be regarded as crucial, as the decision had been narrowly carried by 7 votes to 6, and was met by cries of “Shame on You” from the public, as reported on BBC Spotlight tv the same evening.

Last night at Knowle, Councillor Diviani replied that he had to vote the way he had at the DCC Health and Adult Care Scrutiny Committee because he was representing the views of the eight Devon District Councils. But when Cllr Roger Giles, Chair of EDDC Scrutiny Committe, then asked him if he had consulted Mid Devon, North Devon, South Hams, Teignbridge, Torridge and West Devon, the answer was no.

So is the oft-repeated phrase from Cllr Diviani and close colleagues, “We are where we are” , the consequence of poor leadership? Fortunately in democratic Britain, our leaders are not permanent fixtures.

Footnote: For reference, one of the questions asked last night, is copied below. All can be heard on the audio recording of the Full Council meeting, soon to be available on the EDDC website.

‘At the 17th May 2017 EDDC Full Council meeting, Councillor Mike Allen said, and the council formally agreed, that care in the community had not yet been proven to work.

Yesterday (25th July 2017), the EDDC Leader voted at Devon County Council Health and Adult Welfare Scrutiny Committee that ‘Your Future Care’ proposals be NOT referred to the Secretary of State. (This decision was made by 7 votes to 6).

Through the Chair, will Councillor Diviani kindly explain how voting against his own Council fits with his leadership of it? ‘

“How Tory Sara Randall Johnson took down rival Claire Wright’s health campaign”

Owl says: So, Honiton and Seaton hospitals sacrificed to Randall-Johnson’s anger?

By P Goodwin, Western Morning News

“As the old saying goes: revenge is a dish best served cold.

For Conservative county councillor Sara Randall Johnson the wait to gain the upper hand on old rival Claire Wright stretched to six years.

When she did, the result was painful and public.

At this week’s bad-tempered and rowdy council health scrutiny meeting, Ms Randall Johnson used her new power of chairmanship to thwart the independent rebel and stamp her authority on the newly-elected authority.

In a move which prompted jeers and cries of “fix” from the public gallery, Randall Johnson ignored a tabled motion to halt hospital bed closure plans and instead allow a fellow Tory, Rufus Gilbert, to seize the momentum by kick starting the debate and swiftly proposing the exact opposite.

She then dismissed Ms Wright’s protest by telling her the power to choose was entirely at her discretion as chair, before moving to a vote against referring the proposals, which was won by a majority of one, with one abstention.

It was a swift and brutal piece of politics. The result: bad headlines averted, no need to trouble Jeremy Hunt with the protests of a rebellious council and the upstart put firmly in her place.

Former Lib Dem county council leader and respected political veteran Brian Greenslade remarked after the meeting that the move had been highly unusual.

He considered that not mentioning or circulating a table motion – one submitted before the meeting begins – was rare: not against procedure but definitely a departure from protocol.

In other words: a low blow but not quite below the belt.

It was clear from the tetchy exchanges during the meeting that there is little love lost between the two women and this is perhaps no surprise.

Wright pulled off a shock victory when she ousted Randall Johnson from her East District Council seat and her position as leader, relegating her into third place in a race for two seats, by the slender margin of just 25 votes.

The defeated leader put on a brave face, claiming she had got her life back after 20 years of public service, but this hardly sounds like the words of a woman who just two years earlier was vying with Sarah Wollaston to become MP for Totnes.

Since that victory, Wright, an outspoken independent campaigner, has become a painful thorn in the side of local Tories at district and county level, particularly around the NHS, where she worked in PR before launching her political career.

She has led the opposition ever since, including two general election campaigns in which she gave MP Hugo Swire a run for his money.

But the campaign to halt bed cuts and hospital closures has been a major factor in her rallying call to local people, the jewel in her campaigning crown.

The recent background to Tuesday’s meeting went like this:

Plans by the Northern, Eastern and Western Devon Clinical Commissioning Group to axe 71 beds across four cottage hospitals sparked anger in the Eastern locality.

Amid fears the NHS is planning to sell off the hospitals, relations between the public and NHS officials deteriorated with many accusing executives of lying about their true intentions.

Campaigners, angry that the case has still not been made for the Your Future Care model of home visits, labelled the consultation a sham and turned to the Health and Wellbeing Scrutiny Group for help.

It could refer to Mr Hunt though in reality it the plans would have gone to an independent reconfiguration panel who would make recommendations.

What many people wanted was a change in the way the CCG operates and communicates. they wanted a more open approach and they felt this might give the health trust a jolt.

Under the chairmanship of veteran Labour councillor Richard Westlake, the scrutiny group was poised to refer the plans to the Secretary of State if 14 documented points were not addressed.

But he stepped down at the election and Ms Randall Johnson took up control.

At the first meeting of the newly constituted committee in June, it became clear that she did not intend to let this happen.

Ms Wright had proposed to the last meeting that it was time to vote to refer to the Health Secretary and the chair repeatedly came under fire for not putting this to a vote.

There was a lack of clarity among one or two members about the whole process and eventually, members were persuaded to defer a decision until yesterday to get more information.

It appeared that the Conservatives had their ducks in a row on Tuesday.

Wright cried foul when her tabled motion was ignored, claiming she had never seen it happen in six years of committee meetings.

Unfortunately, the legal advice from the council backed Randall Johnson: Motions needed to be proposed and seconded in the meeting.

Would it have changed the vote? Maybe not. It was close though. East Devon leader Paul Diviani rebelled against his members and voted not to refer and one Tory did admit he was wavering.

The way the meeting was handled did little to foster good relations between the council and the community.

Ms Randall Johnson may have done nothing wrong but she certainly didn’t make any new friends in the public gallery.

As for old foes among the membership – no change there.”

http://www.devonlive.com/tory-sara-randall-johnson-derails-claire-wright-s-health-campaign-six-years-after-election-defeat/story-30457493-detail/story.html

Housing crisis still – 10 years after original crash it’s still shaping “the market”

Britain’s housing market remains distorted 10 years on from the global financial crisis, with first-time buyers struggling to scrape together the much bigger deposits they need today, existing owners unable to “climb the ladder” and a gaping price divide between London and regional cities, according to a report out today.

The average house price has grown to £478,142 in London compared with the national average of £209,971. A decade on from the 2007 crash, prices have only just started gaining ground in Wales, Yorkshire and Humberside and the north-west, while values in the north-east are down 9%, according to analysis by the real estate company Savills.

Nationally the typical deposit has doubled to £26,224 while in the capital it has quadrupled to nearly £100,000. In the year to the end of March, about £4bn out of £10.2bn in first-time buyer deposit money came from either the “bank of mum and dad” or government help-to-buy schemes. Interest-only mortgages – which were key to going up the housing ladder – have become a thing of the past, and owners are staying put rather than selling.

The market has slowed overall with a “dramatic slump” in transactions. The HomeOwners Alliance says little more than a third of houses put on the market in London are selling. Those that do sell are taking longer, and owners are having to accept a bigger cut to their asking price. Overall the 2007 crash is “still shaping the UK housing market” and will for years to come, Savills predicts.”

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jul/27/thursday-briefing-house-of-cards-britains-broken-property-market

Bed closures at Honiton and Seaton – the final stitch-up by Tory Councillors

Councillor Martin Shaw (EDA, Colyton and Seaton) reports:

[Names of those voters have been amended – it does not affect the result]

“The 7 councillors who voted NOT to refer the decision to close Honiton and Seaton hospital beds were:

Sarah Randall-Johnson
Paul Diviani (Leader of East Devon District Council, representing Devon district councils), and county councillors
Richard Scott (Exmouth),
Rufus Gilbert,
Sylvia Russell,
Paul Crabb and
Ron Peart.

The 6 councillors who voted against this motion, i.e. to refer the decision, were Claire Wright (Otter Valley, Independent), Brian Greenslade and Nick Way (Liberal Democrat), Hilary Ackland and Carol Whitton (Labour) and Phil Twiss (Honiton, Conservative).

Jeremy Yabsley (Conservative) abstained as did John Berry. Two other Tories,
Jeffrey Trail (Exmouth) and
Philip Sanders, gave their apologies.

Six public speakers, Cllr Roger Giles (Chair of East Devon’s Scrutiny Committee), Paul Arnott (Colyton), Cllr Jan Goffey (Mayor of Okehampton), Cllr Mike Allen, Bob Sturtivant and Stephen Craddock (Honiton), spoke eloquently against the closures for two and a half minutes each. County Councillor Ian Hall (Axminster) and I also addressed the committee for five minutes each.

Three representatives of NEW Devon CCG and the RD&E (who run the hospitals and are working with the CCG) were then allowed to make a very lengthy Powerpoint presentation and contribute freely to the discussion – which none of the public speakers, Ian Hall or I were allowed to do.

Claire Wright had prepared a detailed motion to refer the closures and had submitted it to the Chair before the meeting. However when debate began, Cllr Randall Johnson chose not to call Claire to speak but called Rufus Gilbert who immediately proposed the motion not to refer, which was quickly seconded by Sylvia Russell.

This blatant manoeuvre by the Chair meant that the committee never considered point by point, as Claire’s motion would have required it to, the 14 questions on which it had asked the CCG to satisfy it. Despite an excellent report from Hilary Ackland which concluded that the CCG had failed to convince, the Committee basically abdicated its scrutiny role and blocked a referral without discussing most of the objections which we had raised.

Claire and I are planning to complain about the way the meeting was handled. If you want to watch it, it’s online at

https://devoncc.public-i.tv/core/portal/webcast_interactive/293466.

Thank you all for your support for the hospitals over the last 9 months. Be assured, however, that this is not the end of the matter, since the CCG and RD&E are both developing ‘estates strategies’ which will centre on what to do with space freed up by the closures. “

UK – tax avoidance hot spot

Almost 40% of corporate investments channelled away from authorities and into tax havens travel through the UK or the Netherlands, according to a study of the ownership structures of 98m firms.

The two EU states are way ahead of the rest of the world in terms of being a preferred option for corporations who want to exploit tax havens to protect their investments.

The Netherlands was a conduit for 23% of corporate investments that ended in a tax haven, a team of researchers at the University of Amsterdam concluded. The UK accounted for 14%, ahead of Switzerland (6%), Singapore (2%) and Ireland (1%).

Every year multinationals avoid paying £38bn-£158bn in taxes in the EU using tax havens. In the US, tax evasion by multinational corporations via offshore jurisdictions is estimated to be at least $130bn (£99bn) a year. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/jul/25/netherlands-and-uk-are-biggest-channels-for-corporate-tax-avoidance

The “care outside hospital” check list – cut out and keep

In December 2016, East Devon Watch published this article::

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2016/12/07/the-30-plus-questions-to-be-answered-before-care-at-home-is-authorised/

Owl has been passed a copy of the “30 [plus] questions” that must be asked BEFORE care at home can be implemented:

Pre-implementation

The model of care:

• Does the new model of care align with our overriding ambition to promote independence?
• Is there clinical and operational consensus by place on the functions of the model and configuration of community health and care teams incorporating primary care, personal care providers and the voluntary care sector?
• Is there a short term offer that promotes independence and community resilience?
• Is there a method for identifying people at highest risk based on risk stratification tool?
• Are the needs of people requiring palliative and terminal care identified and planned for?
• Are the needs of people with dementia identified and planned for?
• Is support to care homes and personal care providers, built into the community services specification?
• Is support for carers enhanced through community sector development support in each community?
• Has the health and care role of each part of the system been described?
• Have key performance indicators been identified, and is performance being tracked now to support post implementation evaluation, including impact on primary care and social care?

Workforce:
• Is there a clear understanding of the capacity and gaps in the locality and a baseline agreed for current levels and required levels to meet the expected outputs of the changed model of care?
• Is there a clear understanding of and plan for any changes required in ways of working:
o thinking
o behaviours
o risk tolerance
o promotion of independence, personal goal orientation

• Have the training needs of people undertaking new roles been identified, including ensuring they are able to meet the needs of patients with dementia?
• Do we have detailed knowledge with regards to investment, WTE and skill mix across the locality and a plan for achieving this?
• Are system-wide staff recruitment and retention issues adequately addressed with a comprehensive plan, and where there are known or expected difficulties have innovative staffing models been explored?

Governance, communications and engagement:
• Is there a robust operational managerial model and leadership to support the implementation?
• Has Council member engagement and appropriate scrutiny taken place?
• Is there an oversight and steering group in place and the process for readiness assessment agreed?
• Have providers, commissioners and service users and carers or their representative groups such as Healthwatch agreed a set of key outcome measures and described how these will be recorded and monitored?
• Is there a shared dashboard which describes outcomes, activity and productivity measures and provides evaluation measures?
• Is there an agreed roll out plan for implementation, which has due regard to the operational issues of managing change?
• Is there a comprehensive & joint communications and engagement plan agreed?
• Is there a need for a further Quality or Equality Impact Assessment?

Implementation
• Is there a clinical and operational consensus on the roles of each sector during the implementation phase including acute care, community health and care teams, mental health, primary care, social care, the voluntary care sector and independent sector care providers?
• Is there an implementation plan at individual patient level describing their new pathway, mapping affected patients into new services?
• Are the operational conditions necessary for safe implementation met?
• Have the risks of not implementing the change at this point been described and balanced against any residual risk of doing so?

Post Implementation
• Is there a description of the outcomes for individuals, their carers and communities?
• Are the mechanisms for engagement with staff, users of services and carers in place and any findings being addressed appropriately?
• Is there a process in place for immediate post implementation tracking of service performance including financial impact to all organisations?
• Is longer term performance and impact being tracked for comparison against pre-implementation performance?
• Have we captured user experience as part of the process, and have findings been addressed and recorded to inform the planning of future changes?
• Are there unintended consequences or impacts (e.g. on primary care or social care) which need to be addressed before any further change occurs?
• Is there a clear communication plan for providers and the Public describing the new system and retaining their involvement in community development?

Source: http://www.newdevonccg.nhs.uk/about-us/your-future-care/publications-and-evidence-sources/102085
( point 14, page 94)”

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2016/12/07/the-30-plus-questions-to-be-answered-before-care-at-home-is-authorised/

Tories sacrifice Honiton and Seaton hospitals to party dogma

“By 7 votes (all Conservative) to 6 (2 Liberal Democrats, 2 Labour, 1 Conservative and Independent, Claire Wright), Devon County Council’s Health Scrutiny Committee today sealed the fate of the beds in the two hospitals (and Okehampton) by voting not to refer the closure of beds to the Secretary of State for Health.”

Tory majority sacrifices Seaton and Honiton hospitals at Devon Health Scrutiny

Tory voters – this is totally down to you.

School funding cuts – now you see them, now you don’t

“Last week Justine Greening fudged her own figures – and challenged ours.

Following her announcement, she dared us to update the numbers on schoolcuts.org.uk

But by deliberately announcing an incomplete school funding formula, Justine has made it impossible to do a school-by-school calculation.

The Department for Education is withholding the final school funding formula until September.

Without the full picture, we don’t have enough information to show the real impact of the latest announcement on your school.

As teachers we know that statistics can be used to obscure the truth or to reveal it.

That’s why we will never release numbers until we are sure they are right – and it’s why we must keep scrutinising the Government’s numbers too.

In her school funding announcement, Justine Greening claimed there’s “additional investment” for schools. But the Chancellor hasn’t agreed any new money.

We know that to cover the shortfall in school spending, we need much more than what’s been promised.

And until Philip Hammond announces extra funding for the education budget from the Treasury, we are ultimately looking at a critical cut in school spending.

This is not a win. We can’t allow the Department for Education to pull the wool over the eyes of parents and teachers.

The Government will be expecting us to fall for their trick and back down.

This summer is a test of our resolve. As MPs head home to their constituencies, we must keep challenging them.

Our campaign is already being felt across all rungs of Parliament.

We can’t stop now. Are you in?

Andrew Baisley

School Cuts Campaign”

” How democratic and effective are the UK’s core executive and government?”

“…Conclusions

The UK’s core executive once worked smoothly. It has clearly degenerated fast in the 21st century. Westminster and Whitehall retain some core strengths, especially a weight of tradition that regularly produces better performance under pressure, reasonably integrated action on homeland security for citizens, and some ability to securely ride out crises. Yet elite conventional wisdoms, which dwelt on a supposed ‘Rolls Royce’ machine, are never heard now – after six years of unprecedented cutbacks in running costs across Whitehall; political mistakes and poor planning over Libya, Afghanistan and Iraq; and the unexpected loss of the Brexit referendum. Now the looming threat of leaving the EU on poor economic terms under a ‘hard Brexit’ strategy seems to cap a very tarnished recent record.

The clouds in the form of recurring ‘policy disasters’ and ‘fiascos’ are also gathering. Both the Conservative and Labour party elites and leaderships seem disinclined to learn the right lessons from past mistakes, or to take steps to foster more transparent, deliberative and well-considered decision-making at the heart of government. Like the Bourbon monarchs, the fear might be that they have ‘learnt nothing and forgotten nothing’.”

http://www.democraticaudit.com/2017/07/25/how-democratic-and-effective-are-the-uks-core-executive-and-government-system/

“Pseudo-public space” – watch out Cranbrook

Developers still control the Cranbrook “country park” and heaven knows how much more of East Devon.

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2017/05/24/cranbrook-country-park-to-go-to-public-inquiry/

“Guardian Cities investigation has for the first time mapped the startling spread of pseudo-public spaces across the UK capital, revealing an almost complete lack of transparency over who owns the sites and how they are policed.

Pseudo-public spaces – large squares, parks and thoroughfares that appear to be public but are actually owned and controlled by developers and their private backers – are on the rise in London and many other British cities, as local authorities argue they cannot afford to create or maintain such spaces themselves.

Although they are seemingly accessible to members of the public and have the look and feel of public land, these sites – also known as privately owned public spaces or “Pops” – are not subject to ordinary local authority bylaws but rather governed by restrictions drawn up the landowner and usually enforced by private security companies.

The Guardian contacted the landowners of more than 50 major pseudo-public spaces in London, ranging from financial giant JP Morgan (owner of Bishops Square in Spitalfields) to the Tokyo-based Mitsubishi Estate (owner of Paternoster Square in the City of London) and the Abu Dhabi National Exhibitions Company (owner of the open space around the ExCeL centre)….”

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2017/jul/24/revealed-pseudo-public-space-pops-london-investigation-map

Tories being formally investigated by police for election offences

“Labour MP Wayne David revealed in Parliament this week that the police are “formally considering” investigating the Conservative Party’s 2017 election campaign for illegal activities following a Channel 4 investigation:

Mr David said the Electoral Commission had written to him confirming the police were “formally considering the allegations”.

An undercover investigation by C4 News, broadcast last month, claimed call centre workers may have been carrying out paid canvassing, banned under electoral law, as they promoted key Conservative messages to undecided voters in the weeks before the election. [BBC]
Channel 4 first aired the results of its investigations in June, which included an undercover reporter working at the call centre in question:

The Conservative Party contracted a secretive call centre during the election campaign which may have broken data protection and election laws, a Channel 4 News investigation has found…

These allegations include:

Paid canvassing on behalf of Conservative election candidates – banned under election law.

Political cold calling to prohibited [i.e. TPS registered] numbers
Misleading calls claiming to be from an ‘independent market research company’ which does not apparently exist.

Investigations into the Conservative Party’s 2015 general election campaign found repeated law-breaking, resulting in a record-breaking fine. In addition, a Conservative MP and two senior officials are currently being prosecuted for allegedly breaking the law.”

https://www.markpack.org.uk/150845/police-considering-allegations-conservative-2017-campaign/

EDA County Councillor Martin Shaw on Seaton hospital bed cuts

“PRESS RELEASE

Protestors from Seaton, Honiton, Okehampton and elsewhere in Devon will converge on County Hall again on Tuesday 25th July from 1 pm, before the special meeting of Devon County Council’s Health Scrutiny Committee at 2.15 which will decide whether to refer the closure of beds in the three hospitals to the Secretary of State.

NEW Devon Clinical Commissioning Group proposes to replace the beds with a new system of care at home. We shall be pointing out that:

The new system, which they have been developing only since March, has not been tested in winter, let alone a flu epidemic; it is uncertain that they will be able to staff it effectively over time given the complex travelling arrangements that it requires for medical as well as care staff.

The small number of beds (halved to 71) which they propose to retain across the 3 remaining community hospitals ignores the facts that East Devon has far more over-85s (the key users of community beds) than other areas of Devon and that these numbers are projected to treble in the next two decades.

The remaining beds will not be distributed in an ‘even geographic spread’ as the CCG claim but, concentrated in Tiverton, Exmouth and Sidmouth, give no provision at all in the Axe Valley which is the area of East Devon furthest from the RD&E.

The closure of beds is driven by the CCG’s aim of reducing the amount of rent which it has to pay to NHS Property Services for community hospital space, and is probably a prelude to the gradual elimination of community hospitals over the next few years.

Six speakers from the affected communities will address the Committee in the Public Participation session, and I shall be addressing them as County Councillor for Seaton and Colyton.

We urge that the Committee use its legal power to refer the CCG’s decisions to the Secretary of State.

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

Claire Wright’s information on Health Scrutiny Committee meeting on Tuesday

“The Health and Adult Care Scrutiny Committee will decide whether to refer a decision to close 72 community hospital beds in Eastern Devon, on Tuesday (25 July), to the Secretary of State for Health.

It follows protracted discussions at the previous meeting last month about whether this was the preferred course of action, after I made a proposal to do so.

Dozens of people were in the public gallery waiting to hear what the committee had to say.

A full account of this meeting can be found here –

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

In the end it was decided that a special meeting should take place in July to debate the issue.

The agenda papers for Tuesday’s meeting include a legal paper which sets out some issues that the committee may consider before coming to its decision.

Since the June meeting it has been announced that Honiton Maternity Unit is set to close along with Okehampton and Tiverton’s. The loss of the general medical beds has been a factor in maintaining the viability of those units.

There will be a demonstration from a coachload of people from Seaton and Honiton that will take place at 1pm on Tuesday on the steps of County Hall.

The meeting starts at 2.15pm.

Pic: Giving an interview to ITV about the sad closure of Ottery Hospital’s beds back in 2014.

Here’s the link to the papers: – http://democracy.devon.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=429&MId=2643&Ver=4

How low does a party have to sink before you stop voting for it?

Regardless of political differences, there is one thing that usually guarantees consensus from both political parties and the general public – the importance of protecting vulnerable children.

However, it now seems the Conservative government do not share this consensus.

Charities claim that the government have been refusing compensation to confirmed child sexual abuse victims based on the grounds that they believe that the children ‘consented’ to the abuse. …”

http://evolvepolitics.com/the-tories-are-literally-arguing-that-12-year-old-child-rape-victims-asked-to-be-raped/

And just in case you think this is “fake news” it’s here too, also reported in the Daily Telegraph:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/07/17/child-sexual-abuse-victims-denied-compensation-consented/

Telegraph: “Farmers will be paid to make the countryside look beautiful after Brexit says Michael Gove”

Farmers would receive payments for delivering services such as storing carbon, managing water quality, connecting habitats, reducing flood risk or protecting famous beauty spots and important landscapes.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/07/21/farmers-will-paid-make-countryside-look-beautiful-brexit-says/

Anyone notice a flaw in this scenario?

Farmers who DON’T store carbon, manage water quality, connect habitats, reduce flood risk or protect famous beauty spots and important landscapes WON’T be fined!