No boat-rocking investigative journalism here! Actually, no journalism at all! See if you can spot it:
Category Archives: Accountability
EDDC uses purdah rules to avoid tricky questions on police criminal inquiry into Colyton Village Plan.
The Western Morning News has today covered in detail the situation in Colyton where police investigations are ongoing into aspects of its Village Plan.
When asked questions by the newspaper on this – via its CEO Mark Williams – EDDC hid behind rules covering “purdah” before local and general elections, when council officers must maintain political neutrality and avoid politically contentious subjects and instead went on the offensive against the EDDC Councillor (Cathy Gardner) who brought it into the open, querying where Councillor Cathy Gardner had got her information from, saying it had been known to only three senior officers.
He added that those three officers did not intend to comment until after local county elections on Thursday this week – and (possibly) even not until after the General Election, if anyone involved were to indicate that they wished to stand for Parliament. He said:
“…The council cannot comment on how Councillor Gardner became aware of the police investigation. The Chief Executive and Monitoring Officer were surprised she raised this at a public meeting”.
THIS IS WRONG.
First, because the act of drawing attention to Councillor Gardner breaks his own rule! He is not willing to discuss if any councillor is involved in criminal proceedings in Colyton but IS prepared to discuss Councillor Gardner’s action in drawing attention to it.
Secondly, purdah can be overridden if it is in the public interest as this surely is.
Thirdly, had she not raised this matter at a public meeting – where was she expected to raise it? In private? Far, far too much of THAT going in at EDDC!
Purdah is NOT law, it is advice. Or, as the Local Government Association puts it, Civil Servants ARE (REPEAT ARE) ALLOWED TO:
“Use a politician who is involved in an election when the council is required to respond in particular circumstances, such as in an emergency situation or where there is a genuine need for a member-level response to an important event beyond the council’s control. Normally this would be the civic mayor (as opposed to the elected mayor in those areas with elected mayors) or chairman (that is, someone holding a politically neutral role). If the issue is so serious, it is worth considering asking the council’s group leaders to agree to a response which would involve all of them.”
Click to access purdah-short-guide-public-4d3.pdf
Owl contends that this IS such a circumstance.
“Planning chief faces prison for illegal changes to home”
“A senior Conservative councillor is facing jail for illegally altering her grade II listed 14th-century cottage that was featured on the Channel 4 show Double Your House for Half the Money.
The £830,000 property was held up as a good example of how to renovate an old house. But Barby Dashwood-Morris, 70, had failed to get planning permission from Wealden district council, despite serving as chairwoman of the planning committee.
At Brighton magistrates’ court she admitted six of 22 charges of executing the demolition or alteration of a building affecting its listed character, including removing a barley twist banister and rail and replacing them with a glass panel and new handrail. Some of the alterations to the cottage in the East Sussex village of Hellingly were alleged to have been carried out while she was chairwoman of the committee. The alterations came to light when prospective buyers ordered a survey.
Dashwood-Morris said on the TV show it was “an example of how to turn an ancient Sussex hall into a home that meets all the comforts of modern living”.
She was bailed until a hearing later this month.”
Source: The Times (paywall)
NHS Property is planning to sell hospital sites to private sector health firms
Noted by Claire Wright via Twitter:
“Plans to release NHS-owned land and buildings for commercial use could be further delayed, after the future of a report into the UK’s health system was thrown into doubt.
The Department of Health was due to report its findings into public health in July, but there are now concerns it could be delayed amid wrangling around the June’s General Election.
The project, known internally as Phoenix, is set to overhaul the way in which healthcare services are procured and run.
The new report was set to review the system, and a proposal to split the country into six regions so that buildings could be run more centrally. The Government wants to raise £5bn from the sale of public land by 2020.
This was expected to result in an acceleration of the release of land and buildings to the open market as more surplus stock was identified across the estate. This could have been snapped up by developers wanting to build much-needed homes, or bought by the private sector to be improved and then leased to local health services.
At present, buildings are run and leased to service providers by LIFT Partnerships, which bring together local public health bodies and private sector providers, working with NHS Property Services.
But property professionals have warned that the election could cause further delays to the implementation of the new system.
One developer, who did not wish to be named, said the report was also supposed to clarify the way the estate would be managed in the future.
“This could have also paved the way for private healthcare companies to acquire property to provide better local services,” he said. “These things take long enough as they are without further delays.”
Another warned that any new administration could seek to slow the sale of land or property under pressure from local opposition.”
Devon County Council witholds payment to LEP over CEO 24% salary increase
Owl says: treat the LEP’s comments about the size of its investment with tons of salt, ask for a REAL breakdown of the figure, particularly all expenses related to Hinkley C nuclear power station in Somerset.
“Politicians from across the political spectrum have joined forces to condemn a publicly-funded local enterprise partnership for giving its chief executive a £24,000 pay rise.
Devon County Council has withheld £10,000 of the funding it gives to the Heart of the South West LEP after Chris Garcia, its boss, took a 26% pay rise. Eight Devon district councils have each held back £1,000 in protest.
The LEP was one of six set up in the South West in 2011 to replace the regional development agency (RDA), which was abolished by the incoming coalition government.
Its chief executive’s pay leapt from £90,729 to £115,000 in January, voted through by business representatives on the board in the face of fierce opposition from local authority members.
John Hart, leader of Devon County Council, told a meeting of the full council that Plymouth was the only council on the board which supported the increase. He said the LEP should be called in for scrutiny after Thursday’s local elections “to ask them to justify their existence”.
Alan Connett, Devon Lib Dem leader, asked councillors to pull out of the partnership “until common sense prevails with regard to top management pay increases”.
He told last week’s meeting: “To award a £24,000 pay rise was obscene in the circumstances, at a time when teachers, nurses, doctors and the public sector generally had been under restraint of low or no pay rises for years.”
Coun Hart said the council should take no further action because it had gone past the point where anything could be achieved. He said the RDA was a body that was strong and represented the whole region, and it had some clout behind it. “The six LEPs are six mini-RDAs,” he said.
Coun Hart said the Government put up £189 million to be shared among the six LEPs. “The initial allocation for Devon and Somerset was abysmal. It did improve, but at the same time it’s not much in relation to what was being asked for,” he said. “Now, unfortunately, a decision has been taken by the LEP which is beyond our control, but I think it’s right that we show that we are not happy with what’s going on.”
Coun Hart said some of the money allocated in the second tranche of funding still had not been spent, while the third tranche was on the way.
Exeter Labour county councillor Rob Hannaford said: “The time for this body to be abolished has clearly come.”
A LEP spokeswoman said: “We look forward to working with the confirmed leaders of the local authorities following the elections and working with them on how we can together increase productivity and prosperity for all in Devon, Somerset, Plymouth and Torbay.”
She said the LEP had brought in £722.70 million investment and that the LEP was spending tranche two.”
Nuclear power warning for Brexit talks
“Britain’s power supply could be in jeopardy if it loses access to nuclear fuels and expertise because of Brexit, the government is being warned. Critics say the Tories have no coherent plan for what comes after the Euratom treaty, which governs safety standards, cooperation, research and trade in atomic energy across the EU.
Cross-party MPs are warning that unless proper arrangements are made, Britain could be reduced to a “rule-taker”, forced to comply with European rules and standards without having any say in them. And the UK could end up running out of nuclear fuel for reactors that are relied upon heavily for electricity. “Decisive action must take place now,” says Justin Bowden from the GMB trade union.”
County elections: only 8 seats need to change hands to change the political majority
As EDA candidate Paul Hayward points out on his Facebook page:
“Over the last 8 years, across the whole of Devon, decisions have been made by a majority group with no effective opposition. Result. Cuts, cuts and more cuts.
But in 2017, it only takes 7 seats to change and a new era of cooperation, debate and compromise can begin at Devon County Council.
Services can be protected. Fair funding can be applied. National party politics can be taken out of local government.
On May 4th, please choose to mark Independent, East Devon Alliance on your voting slip.”
You want change, you have to vote for it.
“Tory candidate defends spending up to £1m on West Midlands mayor campaign”
You just KNOW when a Tory candidate has £1 million behind his campaign that most of the people or companies contributing are not doing it out of the goodness of their hearts!
“Labour’s campaign spending is thought to be between £100,000 and £200,000. It has focused on social media campaigning and phone banks, where volunteers call up voters to ask for their support. The Lib Dem candidate has spent about £50,000.”
CPS criteria for election fraud prosecutions
“Proceedings for major infringements will normally be in the public interest.
Proceedings for other infringements may not be in the public interest in situations where:
the offence is of a “technical” nature which does not infringe the spirit of the legislation;
the offence was committed as a result of a genuine mistake or misunderstanding;
the offence could not have influenced the result of the election process; or
the offender has remedied any breach of the law.
If the offence falls to be considered under one or more of the criteria above, the matter may be dealt by way of a caution administered by the police or, where appropriate, the provisions of advice as to an individual’s future conduct.
In practice, it may be difficult to prove that the result of an election has been affected by an infringement. However, the fact that a breach has or may have affected the result of an election is a factor to be taken into consideration in deciding whether proceedings should be instigated.
Whilst every case will of course turn on its own facts, where there is clear evidence that a breach has affected the result or is likely to have done so, the public interest is more likely to require a prosecution – even if the infringement itself is relatively minor.”
Dr Mark Pack notes:
“It’s worth in particular noting that a few of the more common reasons that crop up on online chatter either from Conservatives, or reported as being said by Conservatives, do not feature in the criteria.
In particular, the fact that someone might have secured re-election before a court case could proceed against them is not a factor.
Moreover, prosecutions are not restricted to proceeding only on the basis that the offence altered the election result. That’s only required for one very specific set of legal action, which isn’t what’s at stake in the current cases involving so many Conservative MPs.”
http://www.markpack.org.uk/149609/cps-prosecution-guidelines-election-offences/
Don’t get skewered on NHS pledges
Save Our Hospital Services (SOHS) campaigners are calling on East Devon’s county council candidates to sign a pledge opposing further NHS cuts. …
All Independent East Devon Alliance candidates and Independent Claire Wright have done so – and have shown by words and actions that this is something they passionately believe in.
Unlike Mrs May this morning on Andrew Marr’s show:
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/theresa-skewered-live-tv-refusing-10326568
Anyone who signs the pledge will be held to account in coming months and years but beware those who are signing just for votes … particularly those in the majority party. Judge by past and current actions.
MPs: time for jobs transparency – well, that’s if you feel like it
The Sunday Telegraph says that Theresa May’s “ethics adviser” (an oxymoron if ever there was one!) says General Election candidates should be “as open as possible” and should publish what income streams they currently have and what paid jobs and be clear about whether these would continue if they enter Parliament.
Trouble is, some of our potential MPs find it impossible to be open.
And the punishment for that? Nothing – zero – nada.
Bang go the ethics.
Vanity projects, speculation and unwise development could lead councils to bankruptcy
“Desperate councils risk being plunged into an Icelandic-style financial crisis after investing £1.5bn in the commercial property market, according to Sir Vince Cable, former business secretary.
Heavy cuts in central government funding have left the authorities having to consider increasingly exotic solutions to ease their financial constraints.
Between 2010 and 2015, there was a 37% cut in real terms in central government funding to local authorities. One option – popular in the last couple of years – has been to borrow from the Treasury-run Public Works Loan Board (PWLB) at very low rates of interest and then use the money to invest in commercial property ventures that offer returns of as much as 8%.
But there are fears that the strategy is creating a bubble that could bankrupt some local authorities. “This is not a wise and sensible thing to do,” said Cable, who was business secretary in the Tory-Lib Dem coalition and is standing as Lib Dem candidate in his former seat in Twickenham, south-west London.
“Local authorities have a long and inglorious history of gambling in financial and property markets,” he said. In the 1980s, Hammersmith and Fulham council was one of several local authorities that got into financial difficulties after becoming involved in complex bets on interest rates.
Cable said he could understand why councils were considering such strategies. “When they are massively constrained in what they can do around council tax – and indeed commercial rates – they are trying to prevent even deeper and more damaging cuts by taking these unorthodox measures. In some cases they may succeed, but there is a very high risk of bankrupting their local authorities. It does suggest a certain degree of desperation.”
Local government sources have defended the councils, saying that much of the money is invested in helping regenerate their local areas. But not in all cases. “What is so bizarre, so shocking, is that they are investing in property in other parts of the country,” Cable said. “It makes no sense whatsoever.”
Matthew Oakeshott, an investment manager at Olim Property, said councils were “playing a gigantic game of Monopoly with taxpayers’ cash”.
But authorities badly need returns at a time when interest rates remain low and demands on councils are rising. It is estimated that, by 2020, England’s councils will face a near £6bn funding gap between what they need to spend and what they receive. Most of this shortfall is due to rising costs linked to social care.
Two years ago, the Local Government Association warned that a dozen councils were on the brink of financial failure. Since then, the councils have had to be inventive in seeking to balance their books. Several – such as Eastleigh, Kettering and Maidstone – have successfully exploited loans from the PWLB to invest in commercial property. This, in turn, has attracted interest from other councils.
But such copycat behaviour is a concern, according to Cable, who drew comparisons with 2008, when many councils were left exposed after depositing millions of pounds in high-interest rate accounts offered by Icelandic banks, which then went bust.
“It did very serious damage to some councils,” Cable said. “It should have been a warning to all corporate treasurers in local government to not go anywhere near this.”
The extent to which councils are exposed to a downturn in the commercial property sector is unclear.
Last month, Lord Myners tabled a parliamentary question asking the government to confirm how much money the PWLB had lent to local authorities to invest in commercial real estate between 2011 and 2016, and what it was doing to monitor the risk from such investments.
Responding for the government, Baroness Neville-Rolfe said it was up to the councils to assess risk. She said: “The Public Works Loan Board is not required to collect information on the specific reasons that local authorities borrow from it, and so it does not hold information about the amount of lending that has been used for acquisition of commercial real estate.”
However, estate agent Savills told the Financial Times that councils had invested £1.2bn in commercial property last year and a further £221m so far this year.
An economic downturn could see commercial property yields drop, leaving councils exposed, say analysts. This fear has led some councils to resist investing, but others have developed considerable appetites. The Financial Times reported that Spelthorne borough council – which has assets of just £88m – bought a business park in Sunbury-on-Thames for £360m, having taken out 50 separate loans from the PWLB.
Local government sources played down fears of a bubble, pointing out that every council investment was made on a case-by-case basis and had to meet strict borrowing criteria.
Under the Prudential Code, councils must show that their investment plans are affordable, prudent and sustainable.
A Treasury spokesman said: “Responsibility for local authority spending and borrowing decisions lies with locally elected councillors, who are democratically accountable to their electorates.”
Election irony
Does anyone else find it ironic that Tory candidates are saying that they will “fight for” local hospitals, fairer funding for schools and our precious environment when it is THEIR party that brought the CCG’s that are already cutting beds by stealth, the unfair school funding and which wants to loosen environmental regulations as soon as possible to enable more building on green fields and who are trying to stop frightening air pollution figures being published?
The Tory battle cry seems to be:
“What do we want?”
“No bed cuts, fairer funding for schools and a healthy environment!”
“When do we want it?”
“Er, whenever Mrs May says we can have it, pretty please?”
“When will it be?
“Brexit means Brexit!”
Have fun with that one – and if you vote for the Tories in Devon just hope you, your children and grandchildren can afford a private education and health care and never need to go to an NHS A and E or GP – or breathe the air in our towns, cities and countryside – tall order!
We need a credible opposition at DCC to fight for us. Claire Wright has done a magnificent job fighting for our schools, our hospitals and our environment at DCC – but could do even more with an army of like-minded councillors alongside her whose battle cry would be:
“What do we want?”
“Our fair share in a clean, green Devon”
“When do we want it?”
“When our voters empower us to get it”
“When will it be”?
“When you vote Independent on 4 May!”
So, Independents don’t make a difference … wrong!
“Devon County Council yesterday, voted in favour of my motion on sending a strong message to central government that nature MUST have at least the same level of protection after we leave the European Union.
Only one councillor voted against the motion, which is below.
Devon is thought to be the first council to endorse such a motion in the country. …
and
“At their meeting this week, members of Devon County Council backed a motion by Claire Wright, Independent councillor for Ottery St Mary, asking for retention of at least the same level of protection for wildlife and environment, as provided by EU law. …
… Only one councillor voted against the motion – Cllr Richard Hosking of Yealmpton – who said the EU habitats regulations had “very many shortcomings”. Great crested newts were either “very successful at parachuting into every environmental impact assessment I have seen, or they are much more prevalent than their protection suggests”, Cllr Hosking said.”
Sidmouth husting cancelled … so what would we have liked to see debated?
It appears only two of Sidmouth’s DCC candidates were prepared to attend tonight’s husting, which has now been cancelled at short notice – Stuart Hughes (Conservative ex- Monster Raving Loony) and Marianne Rixson (Independent East Devon Alliance).
Such a pity as there are burning questions for the Sidmouth and Sidford candidates, and the incumbent in particular, such as:
Asking Councillor Hughes why he seems to value photo-opportunities and silly songs
over action (for example, Alma Bridge…talk for years…no action)
The state of our roads in Sidmouth and Devon – Councillor Hughes having been in charge of them at DCC for years.
His worrying lack of preparedness about said highways when he should have known the information about them that should have stopped Sidford Industrial Estate ever getting into the local plan – information Sidmouth Councillor Rixson uncovered and used to help to stop it. A story of too little too late.
Councillor Hughes also needs to clarify his views on the NHS. While Sidmouth retains beds in this round of cuts, no-one can predict the future and the hospital will certainly come under pressure with extra patients from Axminster, Honiton and Seaton.
Unfortunately, a vote for Councillor Hughes is a vote for cuts – NHS and just about everything else including social care and education – big DCC responsibilities.
Councillor Rixson, and the local community, stopped the industrial estate. Councillor Rixson is an indefatigable supporter of our NHS and sees the issues way beyond the narrow confines of whipped party politics.
Councillor Rixson is the ONLY credible contender to beat Councillor Hughes, given the results from the 2015 election and to help beat any future cuts in the pipeline.
No wonder other candidates didn’t plan on turning up!
Seaton Hospital: closure by stealth?
From Facebook today – surely an issue for any judicial review – manipulation of bed figures to enforce closure?
“I had to take my dad to the hospital in Exeter for a procedure. This has all gone well and they were going to move him to a different ward to recuperate perhaps for ten days.
I said it would be good if he could be moved to Seaton Hospital. I was told that staff had been told not to send people to Seaton. The look of disgust on the doctors face suggested that there was more to that sentence along the lines of ‘because they want to keep it empty so that it looks like it is not being used’.
I then walked out of the ward with my father and the porter of whom I asked where my father would be going. He did not know because there were no beds at that time!! In the words of John Lydon ‘Do you ever get the feeling you’ve been cheated?”
Will Colyton village plan revelations and local health issues affect DCC election choice?
Three major developments may affect how people choose to vote in Devon County Council elections next week.
First, and most tantalising, is the ongoing serious allegation that there seems to be a police investigation ongoing into Colyton’s EDDC villages plan, see here:
This project is somewhat similar to the Neighbourhool Plan project which also hit controversy right from the start, as reported by Owl:
https://eastdevonwatch.org/2015/09/23/a-few-tips-for-the-colyton-and-colyford-neighbourhood-plan/
Seven volunteers resigned from the project, their letter stating:
… This is the community’s plan, not the parish council’s or a few of the individuals who seem to control it. The entire community has the final say in what goes into it. We urge all residents of the parish to ensure that the plan is truly representative of everyone’s collective aspirations for the parish in the coming years. Our concern is that a few could perhaps dictate how the communities are shaped, which would be disastrous for the parish as a whole. …
http://www.colyton-today.co.uk/article.cfm?id=104098&headline=COLYTON
Colyton voters might be advised to perhaps go for a DCC councillor from outside the parish this time round.
Second is, of course, the closure of Axminster Hospital in-patient beds to the north and scheduled closure of Honiton’s in-patient beds to the west and Seaton’s to the south. DCC candidate Mrs Parr (Conservative) is on record as having been persuaded by CCG plans to close these beds. Jim Knight, who having been passed over for selection is standing as an “Independent” Conservative (whatever that is – how do voters differentiate it from UKIP these days?) is between a rock and a hard place on this one too?
DCC has the major committee for holding health authorities to account and Independent Claire Wright is doing a sterling job of fighting for us, but she desperately needs the help of others prepared to fight with her.
So, who is left?
Well, that’s the third issue.
Let’s dismiss tha Labour candidate – who had to be parachuted in from Exeter who no-one (including Labour activists) seems to know anything about!
Let’s also dismiss Peter Burrows (Lib Dem) – who declined to face voters at a recent hustings (but apparently crept into the back of the room towards the end). Who uses family connections to the health service to boost himself, rather than his own actions, which are surprisingly thin on the ground. Also Burrows has recently become notorious as a censor on the 1500-strong Facebook group, ‘It’s Seaton Devon Thank You Very Much’, of which he is administrator. After deleting posts by Shaw and others about the hospital beds, he even removed Shaw – and various other people with no connection to his campaign – from the group, provoking a considerable backlash.
With this controversy around Burrows’ role, Knight could come in ahead of him and see Burrows struggling to come third as in 2013.
This leaves the field wide open for the only other contender – Martin Shaw, Independent East Devon Alliance. Shaw has been vociferous in his support of retaining beds at Seaton Hospital, instrumental in organising a legal opinion to fight closures and has proved to be something of a tiger in his role on the town council’s planning committee.
Will voters feel minded to dismiss the “same olds” of the past and vote for someone untainted by past choices and misdemeanors?
Let us hope so.
How to contribute to judicial reviews for Seaton and Honiton hospitals
All three EDA candidates for Devon County Council have You Tube links
Marianne Rixson – Sidmouth and Sidbury
Paul Hayward (Axminster) and Martin Shaw (Seaton and Colyton):
and all three have signed the pledge to make NHS protection a top priority:
Police investigation into Colyton Village Plan: question raised at EDDC
Something rather odd happened at East Devon District Council’s full council meeting earlier this week.
With some Tory eyebrows shooting skywards, gutsy EDA Leader, Councillor Cathy Gardner asked the following question of EDDC’s Paul Diviani:
“I am sure you are aware, as I am,” she began, “that there is an ongoing Police Investigation into aspects of the Colyton section of the emerging Villages Plan. It may, therefore, be proven that undue influence has distorted the content of the plan. If that does turn out to be the case, do you agree that it is the responsibility of this Council to rectify the result of this influence – in order to ensure the residents of Colyton are not adversely affected and to do so before the plan goes to the (Planning) Inspector?”
What could she be referring to?! “Undue influence”? Surely not.
The two previous questions to Cllr Diviani had been vigorously taken by CEO Mark Williams. Williams didn’t seem to fancy answering this one, though. He sat impassively, even though Chairman Stuart Hughes leaned in to see if he wanted to contribute.
Cllr Diviani replied in somewhat woolly terms thus:
“Well, in terms of the Villages Plan that’s on its progress as it currently stands. I can’t see a reason why we should be inclined to second guess what an Inspector or other authority or otherwise is going to do and in that respect I will reserve judgement as to when we actually do take action.”
Tories shot glances at each other. Action? Against whom? And why? And what did he mean by “other authority”?
The Colyton Village Plan was the subject of a last minute amendment on 27th February 2017 when the Coly Valley’s two district councillors spoke about the disused Ceramtec factory. Of them, Cllr Godbeer was present last night.
Not available to comment was Vice Chairman Helen Parr (also a County candidate) who chose to attend Colyton’s Annual Parish Meeting instead.
East Devon Watch 