To those MPs who employ their spouses and partners (including Hugo Swire), some of whom say they need to employ them for their loyalty and trustworthiness, Owl says:
It’s easy – employ them as unpaid volunteers.
“Big Society” in action! Sorted!
Category Archives: Accountability
More NHS crisis evidence from front-line staff
As reported by health campaigner and Independent DCC councillor Claire Wright:
“Patients are being left stranded on trolleys without access to vital medical supplies and sent home too soon amid widespread hospital crowding, doctors say.
More than half of medics polled by the Royal College of Physicians (RCP) said patient safety has deteriorated over the past year and three quarters fear dangers to patients within 12 months.
The survey of more than 2,100 RCP members from across the UK found that 84 per cent had experienced staffing shortages. And less than half thought doctors at their trust would speak up if they were concerned about risks to patients.
In the survey, doctors said they were “firefighting”, “papering over the cracks” and “hanging on by their claws”. One said: “The hospital is operating at full capacity all of the time, We are asked (almost daily) to ‘lower our thresholds’ for what we consider to be a safe discharge.”
Medics said they were working in circumstances which were “completely unsafe” for patients, with one describing 55 emergency beds being opened, without extra staff.
“Currently the hospital is overfull, with patients on trolleys in corridors and in the middle of the bay (with no curtains, access to electricity, oxygen etc) .. elective surgery has been cancelled (including cancer surgery)” said one. “I feel like I’m on the Titanic” said another.
Research by the royal college found 43 per cent of doctors were working in departments with shortages of medics.
Prof Jane Dacre, RCP President, will today tell the college’s annual conference that doctors were being “pushed to their limits”. “We worry that there are inherent safety risks in a hospital running at full or over capacity – from an increase in hospital acquired infections to the impact of burnout from overworked staff,” she said.
Janet Davies, chief executive and general secretary of the Royal College of Nursing, said: “Hospital doctors are blowing the whistle on sliding standards in patient care – wards are full and without the staff to cope.
“Nursing staff share their fear that things will get even worse in the next year.”
Philip Dunne, health minister, said: “We want to make the NHS the safest healthcare system in the world supported by world-class doctors and nurses – that’s why there are already 34,800 extra clinical staff, including over 11,600 additional doctors and over 13,400 additional nurses on our wards since May 2010. “
Conservative Party fined laughable £70,000 for breaking election rules
Owl says: £70,000 – laughable. Four pots of Hugo Swire’s honey (allowing for inflation) auctioned off at the next Tory fundraiser will sort that out. £700,000 better, £7 million best! AND if the party can’t keep track of this sort of accounting – what sort of mess is it making regionally and nationally!
“The Electoral Commission has fined the Conservative Party £70,000 over “significant” election campaign expenses issues.
The independent elections watchdog said the party had made “numerous failures” in reporting its expenses for the 2015 General Election and three by-elections in 2014.
It has also referred one matter, relating to the party’s treasurer declaring he had examined the return and believed it to be complete and correct, to the Metropolitan Police.
The investigation found the party’s 2015 General Election spending return was missing payments worth at least £104,765.
Separately, payments worth up to £118,124 were either not reported to the Commission or were incorrectly reported. …
… Commission chairman Sir John Holmes said the Tories’ failure to follow the rules “undermined voters’ confidence in our democratic processes” and said there was a risk political parties were seeing such fines as “a cost of doing business”.
The fine comes after a dozen police forces announced they had sent files to the Crown Prosecution Service as part of a probe into the Conservatives’ 2015 election expenses.
The allegations centre around whether spending on hotels for visiting activists and certain campaign material was incorrectly registered as national rather than local spending.
At least three Tory MPs have been quizzed by police investigating whether election finance laws were broken in the 2015 contest.
Sir John said: “Our investigation uncovered numerous failures by a large, well-resourced and experienced party to ensure that accurate records of spending were maintained and that all of the party’s spending was reported correctly.
“The rules established by Parliament for political parties and their finances are there to ensure transparency and accountability.
“Where the rules are not followed, it undermines voters’ confidence in our democratic processes, which is why political parties need to take their responsibilities under the legislation seriously.”
He went on: “This is the third investigation we have recently concluded where the largest political parties have failed to report up to six-figure sums following major elections, and have been fined as a result.
“There is a risk that some political parties might come to view the payment of these fines as a cost of doing business; the Commission therefore needs to be able to impose sanctions that are proportionate to the levels of spending now routinely handled by parties and campaigners.”
Responding to the investigation, a Conservative Party spokesman said the party had complied fully with the investigation and will pay the fines imposed.
“As we have consistently said, the local agents of Conservative candidates correctly declared all local spending in the 2015 general election.”
He said the party’s campaign headquarters “accepted in March 2016 that it had made an administrative error by not declaring a small amount constituting 0.6 per cent of our national spending in the 2015 election campaign.
“This error was subsequently corrected and the Party has since improved its accounting practices, reporting structures and staff guidance. Even taking this into account, the Conservative Party still considerably underspent the statutory national spending limits for the 2015 general election.”
Postal votes and election rules – a worrying anomaly in the rules
Electoral rules currently allow political parties to invite voters to send postal ballot application forms (not the actual completed ballot papers) to political party offices rather than to the local authority conducting the election. As the website Skwawkbox says below, this would appear to be potentially fraught with the risk of facilitating fraudulent applications, but it is currently permitted.
However, political parties are not allowed to encourage voters to do this. In fact, the Postal Vote Code of Conduct instructs them to discourage it by making the preferred return address that of the official Electoral Returning Officer.
However, blogsite Skwawkbox:
Yet another Tory electoral breach – the SKWAWKBOX needs your help
gives an example where a local Tory office of a nearby authority (Somerset) gave its own address as its first option and that of the Electoral Returning Officer as the second option. With no address given for the ERO.
From Skwawkbox.
“A local resident wrote to Somerset County Council’s Strategic Manager of Governance and Risk about this breach and received this response:
“Thanks for sending a scan of the letter. Having studied the Code of conduct for campaigners in Great Britain and spoken to the Electoral Commission the letter should have the Electoral Services Office as the primary address for return of the form. The letter can include a secondary address.
Clearly this is not the case with the example that you sent through. Campaigners can receive completed forms and should then forward them to the Electoral Registration Officer’s address within two working days of receipt.
In the light of what you have sent through Pat Flaherty as County Returning Officer has raised this formally as an issue with the Conservative Party elections agent to point out what needs to happen under the requirements of the Code.”
As Skwawkbox says:
“This may seem like a small ‘technicality’, but it’s in such seemingly insignificant areas that space for election-tampering can exist – affecting the wellbeing of thousands and even millions of our citizens. … “
Skwawkbox is asking its readers to check for similar errors on party political websites to see what they say about arrangements for postal vote application forms and to let it know of any potential infringements of the Code of Conduct.
EDDC holds up Freedom of Information request on HQ relocation
It seems EDDC is VERY reluctant to answer any FoI requests relating to relocating its HQ:
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/body/east_devon_district_council
What’s the problem? It can’t be the old chestnut “commercial confidentiality” as the project has not been tendered so there is no outside commercial involvement.
Requests now cover not only Knowle but also the massive cost overrun at Exmouth and the added costs of relocating the Estates Department to Manstone Depot.
From one HQ to an HQ and two satellites. All against a background of massively increasing costs, decreasing availability of skilled labour and no plan for how it will be financed after PegasusLife failed to get its planning permission.
Hundreds of thousands of pounds already spent (excluding officer costs which are never added in), expensive days in court losing to the Information Commissioner.
What is being concealed?
Election expenses scandal website
Keep up to date and see the history here:
Will Swire do the right thing and fire his wife? Or will she do the right thing and resign?
“MPs will be banned from hiring relatives using public money after the next general election, according to new rules issued by the expenses watchdog.
The new rules, released on Wednesday, state that no new “connected parties” can be employed in politicians’ offices. Members of MPs’ families who are already employed will be allowed to continue to work in their offices, despite widespread criticism of the practice.
The Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (Ipsa) said it would not force MPs to sack individuals who are currently working for them.
The rule change was released following a comprehensive consultation of MPs’ business costs and expenses. It comes amid the scandal in France over allegations that presidential candidate François Fillon paid his wife hundreds of thousands of pounds for little work.
Ipsa’s senior officials have argued that the employment of “connected parties” is out of step with modern employment practice, which requires fair and open recruitment to encourage diversity in the workplace.
Pay for MPs’ relatives costs the public purse around £4m a year, and around 150 are currently on the payroll.
Employing relatives is one of the most controversial practices still allowed under the changed expenses rules….
… MPs will be banned from hiring relatives using public money after the next general election, according to new rules issued by the expenses watchdog.
The new rules, released on Wednesday, state that no new “connected parties” can be employed in politicians’ offices. Members of MPs’ families who are already employed will be allowed to continue to work in their offices, despite widespread criticism of the practice.
The Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (Ipsa) said it would not force MPs to sack individuals who are currently working for them.
The rule change was released following a comprehensive consultation of MPs’ business costs and expenses. It comes amid the scandal in France over allegations that presidential candidate François Fillon paid his wife hundreds of thousands of pounds for little work.
Ipsa’s senior officials have argued that the employment of “connected parties” is out of step with modern employment practice, which requires fair and open recruitment to encourage diversity in the workplace.
Pay for MPs’ relatives costs the public purse around £4m a year, and around 150 are currently on the payroll.
Employing relatives is one of the most controversial practices still allowed under the changed expenses rules.
In 2009, the Committee on Standards in Public Life recommended a ban on the practice as it was “not consistent with modern employment practice designed to ensure fairness in recruitment, management of staff and remuneration”.
Proposals to ban family members from working for MPs following parliament’s expenses scandal were dropped by Ipsa after a backlash from politicians – with the caveat that they were restricted to putting just one family member on the payroll.
MPs who have employed family members include the defence secretary, Michael Fallon, and the Conservative MP Johnny Mercer, who employs his wife, Felicity.
Many MPs say their relatives are willing to work much longer hours than they could ask of other staff. They believe the practice helps them maintain a family life amid the long hours and pressures of Westminster.
A report by the watchdog earlier this year revealed that the pay of connected parties is on average £5,600 higher than that of other staff, and going up at twice the rate of other staff in parliament. At the time of the last general election, relatives’ average salary was £31,350 a year.
Ipsa has said controls to prevent misuse of public funds in payments to family members are “limited”. There is no central time-keeping system for MPs’ staff, and MPs are responsible for monitoring and paying overtime.
Ipsa said it was “difficult to discover whether MPs are breaking the rules” and said there was a risk MPs could break the rules or “act fraudulently without detection”.
It added: ‘The quality of our data records and the absence of controls to prevent false declarations of connected party status means that there is a high risk that any instance of an undeclared or inaccurate status will not be identified.’
Between 2010 and 2015 the cost of employing MPs’ relatives was about £21m.”
Election expenses scandal – Devon and Cornwall info passed to Crown Prosecution Service
“Twelve police forces have passed files to the Crown Prosecution Service over allegations that Conservatives broke campaign spending laws at the last election, after a 10-month investigation by police forces across the country.
The revelation is likely to increase concern in Downing Street and the Conservative party about the seriousness of the investigations, which could affect several sitting MPs and even lead to election results being declared void if there are prosecutions.
The CPS said it had been passed files from Avon and Somerset; Derbyshire; Cumbria; Devon and Cornwall; Gloucestershire; Greater Manchester; Lincolnshire; the Metropolitan police; Northamptonshire; Nottinghamshire; West Yorkshire; and Staffordshire police.
Continue reading
More MASSIVE speculative industrial development at Clyst Honiton with benefits to LEP
Owl says: watch the claims of “new” jobs – most companies are relocating from premises just outside the “Growth Point” to take advantage of subsidies such as business rate holidays and are NOT creating “new”jobs at all.
“It appears major development at Clyst Honiton on the edge of Exeter will not cease any time soon, with outline plans in for an 110,000sqm industrial park next to the Lidl depot. The massive development would create between 1,530 and 1,817 new jobs and contribute an extra £90 to £105m to the regional economy. [Owl says: pinch of salt needed here – Skypark made similar claims but has attracted few NEW jobs – mostly only locally relocated ones, see above].
It’s second phase of development at land at Hayes Farm on behalf of Church Commissioners For England. The huge chunk of land is earmarked for more storage and distribution warehouses, offices and business space as part of the Exeter and East Devon Growth Point.
It would also need associated parking, servicing, yard areas, landscaping and engineering works including demolition of existing building within the site. The development also sits near the Skypark, a similar development of a similar size [Owl:which is currently still mostly empty after several years of marketing and an abortive attempt to relocate the EDDC HQ from Sidmouth].
At the moment the future occupiers are unknown, but it’s possible a major company could take the entire site. Options for the land include space for 540 car parking spaces on a two unit scheme, and 530 for a multi-unit scheme. [Translation: speculative building].
Alongside news of the latest planning application, buildings at the nearby Skypark development are already taking shape. Built over 20 years, the 110-acre Skypark site will provide 1.4 million sq ft of warehouse, industrial and office space and deliver up to 6,500 new jobs.
When it completes this autumn, this new office building will create 17,142 sq ft of employment space.
The new offices will join the Ambulance Special Operations Centre (ASOC West) and DPD UK’s new 60,000 sq ft distribution centre on site [relocated from nearby Sowton]. They will benefit from the £3.5 million worth of investment in road and services infrastructure at Skypark and the five-acre public realm area, complete with trim trail exercise stations.
Ian Guy, Senior Development Manager for St. Modwen and Devon County Council’s development partner for the £210m Skypark development, said: “These speculative [Owl’s BOLD] offices are going up alongside the new headquarters for Devon and Cornwall Housing [relocating from central Exeter], which is also under construction on site. They represent the first major office development in Exeter for many years and are a strong sign of the improving occupier market in the local area.”
How can you say the market is improving when buildings are speculative, they have no confirmed interest and those which ARE occupied are taken by locally relocated businesses taking advantage of incentives such as no business rates for 5 years to move. And, of course, the Local Enterprise Partnership benefits!
“The current iteration of Enterprise Zones was established by the Government in 2012, as part of their long-term economic plan. They are geographically defined areas, which aim to support growth by encouraging businesses to locate within them, providing a number of incentives including:
Up to 100% business rate discount worth up to £275,000 over 5 years
Simplified local authority planning
Roll out of super-fast Broadband where necessary
For zones in Assisted Areas, 100% enhanced capital allowances (tax relief) to businesses making large investments in plant and machinery.
Any business rates growth generated by the Enterprise Zone (over the next 25 years) is retained by the Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) to reinvest in local economic growth.”
Tory voter or NHS supporter? You can’t be both
Up to 100 Tory MPs believed to have been ready to revolt over National Insurance hike for self-employed. Result: abandoned after Budget within a week.
Absolutely no Tory MPs ready to revolt about cuts, privatisation and contraction of NHS. Result: it goes forward – with budget funding to speed it up.
Tory voter or NHS supporter? No middle ground.
Who will help people in sub-standard new build homes?
“There are rising concerns that the rush to build new homes is causing housebuilders to cut corners. Many firms have set tough targets to cash in on huge demand.
There are rising concerns that the rush to build new homes is causing housebuilders to cut corners. Many firms have set tough targets to cash in on huge demand — and meet the Government’s pledge to build 200,000 new homes a year.
Thousands of victims of poor workmanship have formed groups on social media websites such as Facebook, including Taylor Wimpey Unhappy Customers, Avoid Persimmon Homes and Bovis Homes Victims Group.
Hundreds have posted on Snagging.org — named after the jargon builders give to the task of finishing a project — citing problems such as creaking floors, scratched windows and stained carpets.
Campaign groups want a new homes ombudsman who can step in when families are let down. Buyers should also be given a chance to inspect their new-build before being handed the keys, they say.
Paula Higgins, chief executive of HomeOwners Alliance, says: ‘You have more consumer protection when you buy a toaster.
‘The industry is tilted too far in favour of developers, and the complaints system is too confusing.’
A report by the All-Party Parliamentary Group for Excellence in the Built Environment found more than nine in ten buyers report problems to their builder.
Oliver Colvile, chairman of the parliamentary group and Conservative MP for Plymouth Sutton and Devonport, says: ‘There have been too many reports of new homes that are quite simply uninhabitable.
‘We need to ensure there is a clear process whereby developers can be held to account and are responsible for correcting any below-par workmanship as soon as possible.’
Britain’s biggest house builders nearly all reported soaring profits last month. Persimmon reported a pre-tax profit of £783 million for 2016 — a 23 per cent increase on 2015.
Barratt Developments saw a 20.7 per cent rise to £682.3 million, Bellway a 36.5 per cent rise to £492 million, Redrow a 35 per cent rise to £140 million and Taylor Wimpey a 21.5 per cent rise to £733.4 million.
Bovis reported a 3 per cent fall in profits but still made £154.7 million.
Bovis has been forced to set aside £7 million to compensate buyers who have complained about the poor quality of its homes.
In January the firm was revealed to have offered up to £3,000 to buyers who moved into their houses by December 23 as it struggled to meet targets.
Sales have been boosted by the Government’s Help to Buy scheme, which has helped 100,284 first-time buyers onto the property ladder since 2013.
All the firms reported an increase in both the number of homes built and average selling prices. …
… A spokesman for the National House Building Council says: ‘We carry out spot check inspections at key stages during construction… [but] the builder is responsible for ensuring homes conform to building regulations and our standards.’
A Taylor Wimpey spokesman says: ‘We recognise that we do sometimes get things wrong, but we are committed to resolving those issues.’
A Bovis spokesman says: ‘We are putting more resource into customer care and reviewing our processes to ensure a focus on quality.’
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/money/article-4314028/Who-help-families-forced-live-half-built-homes.html
Election expenses scandal – update
“Conservative MPs embroiled in an election expenses row have accused party officials of trying to dodge blame.
Two dozen Tories are understood to be under police investigation over claims they overspent on their local campaigns during the 2015 general election in which spending limits are tight.
Karl McCartney, MP for Lincoln and one of those under investigation, wrote a bombshell email to the party chairman attacking the party’s handling of the controversy linked to its election “battle bus”.
In it, he wrote: “We didn’t create this mess, the clever dicks at CCHQ (Conservative Campaign Headquarters) did, and I don’t see their professional reputations being trashed in the media.”
Sky News can reveal:
:: An email sent to 30 Tory MPs claims the party has withheld a draft report it has already received from the Electoral Commission into the issue.
:: A second email to the party chairman claims Conservative Central Office was to blame for the expenses “mess”.
:: The MPs held a showdown meeting with party chairman Patrick McLoughlin on Tuesday afternoon to air their concerns.
:: MPs implicated in the row said they felt “scared” about the outcome of the investigations and believe Downing St is worried.
The spending row centres on the Tories’ use of an election battle bus to campaign in key seats, and whether spending on hotels and campaign material were incorrectly registered as national spending, which has much higher limits than local spending.
Meanwhile, Kent Police refused to confirm reports Tory MP Craig Mackinlay, who defeated ex-UKIP leader Nigel Farage in Thanet South, was questioned under caution last Friday over his expenses.
If Conservatives are found to have committed any offence, their political opponents could ask for the contests to be rerun.
Mr McCartney, a justice of the peace who was elected in 2010 and fought off a challenge from Labour in 2015, is said to be acting as an informal “shop steward” to the group of mainly newly-elected MPs implicated.
He wrote to colleagues last week saying Conservative Central Office (CCHQ) had received a draft report from the Electoral Commission, which has been investigating party spending for a year.
Mr McCartney said this information came from a Conservative-party appointed solicitor who is acting for the group, but claimed the contents of the report had not been shared with MPs.
However, a Conservative source denied officials had received the report.
Mr McCartney wrote: “I have made my disquiet and disbelief at this course of action pretty clear in a blunt email to the party chairman and the whips office overnight.”
In that email, also seen by Sky News, and addressed to Mr McLoughlin who is in the cabinet, he wrote that his colleagues “feel completely cast adrift by CCHQ/whips/the parliamentary party and left to fend for themselves”.
He added: “At what stage do you think you (the Party) might inform us that another media s***storm is coming? We didn’t create this mess, the clever dicks at CCHQ did, and I don’t see their professional reputations being trashed in the media much.
“The initial cock-ups, ‘strategy’ and ineptitude with regard to this issue that has so negatively impacted our: lives, standing in our communities, standing amongst colleagues, families and our regard for particular parts of the Party centrally, and were all of CCHQ’s making…need to stop.
“We are the ones who are now (and since the beginning as individuals have been) in the media spotlight and it might have been a little more reassuring and collegiate if the powers that be in our party perhaps tried to be a little bit more supportive and less interested in covering their own backsides.”
Mr McCartney asks why MPs were not warned about the Electoral Commission report, expected to be made public in the coming weeks.
He said none of the MPs have been questioned by the Commission and asked: “Who else has had a copy? And what are the ramifications of its current version and what if it accepts your feedback and rewrites whole swathes of their draft?”
He asked the party chairman for guidance on dealing with media inquiries, saying: “We do need a press release for national and local media interest. I would rather sing from the same hymn sheet.”
On his website, he wrote: “The Conservative Party advised us that the so-called campaign ‘battle buses’ were, as at previous general elections and in keeping with the practice of both the Labour Party and Liberal Democrats, a national campaign expense.
“This meant that they were not to be declared in our own election expenses.”
Another of the MPs in the group, elected in 2015, and under police investigation said they firmly believed the spending was correctly registered.
The MP said: “People are scared, this has been hanging over us for more than a year. I absolutely believe it was legitimately national spending in my case.
“Our solicitor which they have paid for agrees that the law is what it is and we haven’t broken it. But I think CCHQ have been quite complacent about how far it would go. No 10 is now very concerned about it.”
A Conservative spokesman said: “We are cooperating with the ongoing investigations.”
Election expenses scandal: some Tory MPs in panic mode
Our current Police and Crime Commissioner, Alison Hernandez, was election agent for MP Kevin Foster [Torbay] who took the seat from Lib Dems with a majority of 3,286 at the last election with just over 40% of voters choosing him.
“A Conservative MP has been interviewed under caution as part of an ongoing police inquiry into whether the party overspent in its campaign for South Thanet in the 2015 general election, when they were up against Nigel Farage.
Craig Mackinlay, the MP who won the seat against the former Ukip leader, is said to have spent about six hours speaking to police about their investigation, which has been going on for about a year.
Asked about the interview, a Conservative spokesman said: “We are cooperating with the ongoing investigations.” Mackinlay did not reply to a request for comment.
There is growing panic in the Conservative party about the scale of police probes into election spending, which could affect dozens of MPs. A separate investigation by the Electoral Commission into whether the national party broke election spending limits is also under way and expected to come to a head within weeks.
The allegations, first uncovered by Channel 4 News, are that spending in marginal seats on a battlebus tour and teams of party officials was wrongly recorded as national, rather than local spending.
The penalties for wrongly declaring local elections are steep, with possible criminal charges for MPs and their election agents, and results can be declared void.
It is understood police could meet the Crown Prosecution Service as early as 21 March to discuss bringing a possible charge in relation to South Thanet, where Farage was narrowly beaten by Mackinley.
Nigel Farage says he would stand for election again in South Thanet
Farage, the former Ukip leader, has already said he may be interested in rerunning in the Kent coastal seat if it there were to be a prosecution and byelection.
Kent police said: “The investigation into this complex matter is ongoing and officers continue to follow lines of enquiry. Therefore it would not be appropriate to comment further.
“Officers from Kent police continue to work with the Electoral Commission as the investigation continues.”
Separately, a group of Conservative MPs under investigation over their election expenses are growing increasingly frustrated at the lack of support from the party’s headquarters.
One has sent an email to Tory HQ accusing the party of keeping secret a draft of the Electoral Commission report from MPs whose local spending returns are under investigation.
In an email seen by Sky News, Karl McCartney, a Tory MP [Lincoln] under investigation who is helping other MPs, accused party officials of trying to save themselves rather than help those who were elected.
He wrote that his colleagues “feel completely cast adrift by CCHQ/whips/the parliamentary party and left to fend for themselves”.
He added: “At what stage do you think you (the party) might inform us that another media s***storm is coming? We didn’t create this mess, the clever dicks at CCHQ did, and I don’t see their professional reputations being trashed in the media much.”
“The initial cock-ups, ‘strategy’ and ineptitude with regard to this issue that has so negatively impacted our: lives, standing in our communities, standing amongst colleagues, families and our regard for particular parts of the party centrally, and were all of CCHQ’s making … need to stop.
“We are the ones who are now (and since the beginning as individuals have been) in the media spotlight and it might have been a little more reassuring and collegiate if the powers that be in our party perhaps tried to be a little bit more supportive and less interested in covering their own backsides.”
Crackdown on MPs employing family – will it affect Mrs Swire (salary £30,000+)?
Mr Swire has employed Mrs Swire for many years as a “Senior Researcher” and has said in the past that she helps with his press releases and website.
“MPs are to be hit with tougher restrictions on employing their wives and children amid concern of a François Fillon-style scandal in Britain, The Sunday Telegraph understands.
New stricter rules on employing relatives from the taxpayers’ purse are expected to be announced this month in the biggest expenses shake-up in six years. The Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (Ipsa), created after The Telegraph’s expenses investigation, will start contacting MPs from tomorrow.
Politicians are likely to be urged to advertise all available jobs, interview candidates not linked to them and justify any hiring of relatives to voters.
There remains some public concern about MPs’ employment of ‘connected parties’ … and any financial support provided to MPs’ families, such as by paying for their related travel and accommodation.
However, it is understood that copying a blanket ban on employing family members currently in place in the Scottish Parliament has been rejected.
Sources said the scandal in France over allegations that Mr Fillon, the presidential candidate, paid his wife hundreds of thousands of pounds for little work is being borne in mind.
The move comes as the publication of new expenses records revealed nine MPs claimed for subscriptions to the online video streaming service Amazon Prime. Hollywood’s biggest blockbusters and Jeremy Clarkson’s The Grand Tour are among thousands of shows available on the service, which costs £79 a year.
Some MPs involved said they had made the claims by mistake or were caught in a “subscription trap” after taking out a free trial.
Conclusions from a consultation into Ipsa’s rules – the first comprehensive review since 2011 – will be published as early as this week. The consultation covered a wide array of topics, from how MPs claim expenses for travel and accommodation to diversity among their employees.
The body is expected to approve a significant pay rise for MPs’ staff for the first time in years after a review of current caps. Staff have received only a 1 per cent annual pay rise on average.
But it is changes to rules around MPs employing their wives and partners that are likely to generate headlines. Last March it was found that 139 relatives or people with a “close business connection” were working for Britain’s 650 MPs.
In total they are paid around £4.5 million a year, which has recently made up around 5 per cent of total staffing expenditure. Ipsa warned in its consultation that “controls to prevent misuse of funding on employing connected parties were limited”.
It also said staff with links to MPs had “salaries significantly higher than the average [employee] across all MPs’ staff”, although only because they tended to work in more senior roles. “There remains some public concern about MPs’ employment of ‘connected parties’ … and any financial support provided to MPs’ families, such as by paying for their related travel and accommodation,” the consultation said.
This newspaper has learnt that the watchdog is planning to do more to reassure the public the system of employing spouses and relatives is not being abused. A source said the focus would be on MPs “providing a justification for what they are doing” and “having a recruitment process that is more like the rest of the world”.”
Source: Daily Telegraph via news feed
“Big Society” a big failure says Parliamentary Committee: £1 billion plus wasted
Owl says: Vanity projects – imagine how much we could spend on necessities if they were all abandoned! Hinkley C, HS2, the Big Society, EDDC relocation, Exmouth “regeneration”, Devon and Somerset devolution …!
“A publicly funded £1bn “big society” project set up by former prime minister David Cameron to restore values of responsibility and discipline among young people has been criticised by MPs for lax spending controls and poor management.
The Commons public accounts committee (PAC) said the National Citizen Service (NCS) trust lacked appropriate governance arrangements, could not justify its high costs, and was unable to prove whether its courses had any long-term impact on youngsters.
Meg Hillier MP, chair of the PAC, said: “We urge the trust and central government to review fundamentally the way NCS is delivered and its benefits measured before more public money is committed in the programme’s next commissioning round.”
MPs said that the scheme – which has received £600m in government funding since 2011 and stands to get another £900m investment over the next two years – should be “fundamentally reviewed” by ministers.
Hillier said although there was some evidence the scheme had a short-term positive impact on participants this did not in itself justify the high level of public spending on the programme, nor demonstrate that it would deliver the proposed benefits.
The PAC report criticised the trust for refusing to disclose directors’ salaries, and accused it of a “lack of discipline” after failing to recover £10m paid to providers for unfilled places. It concluded that it was unclear whether the trust management had the necessary skills and experience to run the scheme. …”
“Ministers can no longer ignore protests over the school funding crisis”
” … The Institute for Fiscal Studies warns that by 2020 funding per pupil will have been cut in real terms by 6.5% for schools, and 16-18 education will be at a similar level in real terms to that 30 years ago.
Meanwhile, the costs of employing staff – usually something like 80% of the outgoings of a school or college – are growing because of increases in employer contributions to national insurance and pensions, plus pay increases for which there has been no additional funding from government.
The government is going to find that ignoring this issue is not going to make it go away as voices of protest become louder. Suddenly places that rarely made the headlines – east Cheshire, West Sussex – are in the news, with headteachers, governors and, increasingly, parents are all warning children’s education will be damaged unless funding is found.
The budget could have addressed the educational needs of the many over the few. Instead, what we got was an announcement about building new free schools at a time when schools are having to make £3bn of savings.
Cuts could mean schools close early two days a week, say teachers
There is already a need for some 284,000 new secondary places by 2020. It is therefore essential that any new schools are built in areas where places are needed, rather than creating deliberate surpluses, as has often been the case with free schools. Unless new schools directly help communities that lack school places, then parents and other taxpayers are going to see this as a shocking waste of public money. …
… As I know from my 15 years as a headteacher, always working with specialist business managers, saving, say, £150,000 in your budget in a year, cannot be achieved by deferring new textbooks or leaving the maths block unpainted.
Instead schools will have to increase class sizes in order to maximise the number of students being taught by the minimum number of teachers. They will limit courses at GCSE and sixth-form level to reduce the number of teachers needed. They will even have to contemplate cutting staff time for preparation, marking and planning.
Cuts, cuts, cuts. Headteachers tell of school system ‘that could implode’
This growing crisis comes on the watch of a prime minister and secretary of state for education who talk a lot about social mobility and have identified education as the engine room of national progress. Yet it is disadvantaged students and schools in fragile communities that are likely to be hardest hit by funding reductions that this budget has not addressed.
These are the schools where parent teacher associations are least likely to be able to contribute to funds, where budgets are already being disproportionately used to bring in expensive supply staff from agencies, where decisions not to upgrade facilities simply intensify the social gap between the haves and have-nots.
Many school leaders already serve as the social glue that helps hold together such communities. Now those leaders are saying that on behalf of the children, parents and governors more funding must be found – for all our schools, not just for pet projects.
This is a government that speaks loftily of social justice. In the budget it had one parliament-defining opportunity to put its money where its mouth is. Instead we witnessed the triumph of dogma over evidence.”
(Geoff Barton is headteacher of King Edward VI school, Bury St Edmunds. He was elected general secretary of the Association of School and College Leaders in February 2017)
https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/mar/14/schools-funding-philip-hammond-budget
Health trusts and impossible performance targets
“The QC who carried out a review of failures at the Mid Staffs Hospital five years ago says that a similar collapse is ‘inevitable’ under current circumstances where some health trusts are accepting impossible performance targets.
In an interview with Shaun Lintern for the Health Service Journal, Robert Francis QC warned of a “a real danger of a relapse” unless the present NHS leadership continue to focus on the lessons learned in Staffordshire.
The QC described a repetition of the same problems as “inevitable” in cases where financial stress is combined with unrealistic targets. He said: “If you look at the number of trusts who are not only in deficit but won’t agree their control targets, the fact some are not agreeing their control targets is good because it means they are saying we can’t actually do that and carry on the service you want us to provide.
But there will be those that have said ‘yes’ when they actually can’t do it. Absolutely yes, that is a danger. …”
Information Commissioner v Exeter City Council re business case adjourned
This case has direct ramifications for Exmouth regeneration and Knowle relocation.
“… The lengthy hearing, held independently of the government at Exeter Magistrates’ Court from 10am, was attended by members of the public, city councillor’s and members of the council. It continued into the afternoon with closed sessions which discussed the information in question.
The Information Tribunal was adjourned pending further information to an, as yet, unspecified date after the Judge heard in-part from both sides.
The appellant, Exeter City Council, is battling against the Information Commissioner’s decision that it should publish the details for the business case for the £27 million leisure complex development on the site of the current Bus and Coach Station.
Joined Party, Exeter resident Peter Cleasby, had submitted a Freedom of Information Act request for the details last year, so it could be open to wider scrutiny before contracts were signed. The Council refused on grounds of commercial confidentiality, and Mr Cleasby complained about its refusal to the Information Commissioner.
The Commissioner ordered key information in the business case to be made public, but the council appealed against the Commissioner’s decision. Peter Cleasby added: “Wider scrutiny and challenge of the business case assumptions is vital.”
Before the hearing, a city council spokesman said: “The Council will make its case before the Tribunal. It would be inappropriate to comment further ahead of the hearing.” The council say they are unlikely to comment until a decision is made in the coming weeks.
The development of St Sidwell’s Point has been put on hold because the council has not appointed a contractor. An Extraordinary Meeting of the Council, to direct questions about the delay, will be held at Exeter Guildhall at 6pm on Tuesday. March 21 – after being called in by political opposition.”
Owl grovels …
Somerset is included in LEP plans for super-expansion! But the questions remain and the situation gets even more complex. Will Cornwall and Dorset be happy with SO MUCH money destined for Hinkley C!
Owl has named the new foursome “The Golden Quadrangle” until such time as it is given its own name!
Some questions about the Heart of the South West LEP
If the Heart of the South West LEP is “dead in the water” and “there is no money left”
Where is the £25,000-plus coming from to pay someone to encourage a new threesome of Cornwall and Isles of Scilly, Devon and Dorset?
What’s happening about the divorce from Somerset and are we paying that county’s expenses still?
HOTSW LEP is the vehicle for taking business rates from Enterprise Zones such as the East Devon Growth Point – if it’s defunct what happens to that money?
Who pays Mr Garcia’s salary and those of the 3 or 4 other employees who presumably now have no jobs? Somerset or Devon?
What’s happening about the “Golden Triangle LEP”?
Where does “Greater Exeter” fit in and with whom?
East Devon – where do we fit in? Our Leader is a HOTSW board member and is responsible for HOTSW housing. Is he still responsible for housing in Somerset, Greater Exeter and/or the “Golden Triangle”?
What is DCC’s/EDDC’s role in this – where was it discussed, when and by whom?
Where are the minutes of the meeting where the current deal was dropped and a new deal thought up?
What does Somerset think about all this?
Do YOU recall being consulted on any of this?
East Devon Watch 