Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Democracy, Hugo Swire, Neil Parish

Sharia law may stop MPs subsidised boozing completely

“MPs considered nationalising a Whitehall pub to avoid a drinking ban while they are relocated to the Department of Health’s offices for the duration of refurbishment works at the Palace of Westminster.

Richmond House, which hosts the department, is one of three government buildings owned by Middle East financiers who have bought into an Islamic bond issued by the government. One of its stipulations is that no alcohol will be sold on the premises.

To get around the restriction, some MPs proposed taking the Red Lion pub, located between parliament and Richmond house, into public ownership and banning entry to the general public. However, according to the Times, the move was opposed by Fuller’s Inns, the Red Lion’s owners, and a parliamentary subcommittee eventually ruled out the proposal.

Alternative drinking arrangements will still need to be made for MPs and peers – who at Westminster can choose from 10 licensed bars and restaurants – when they are moved out for the building’s renovation from 2020 onwards.

David Cameron, the former prime minister, unveiled the Islamic bond, known as a Sukuk, in 2013, as part of a drive to raise cash from Islamic investors, who cannot buy into interest-paying government bonds because of religious rules against usury.

Instead, the £200m bond sees investors effectively take ownership of three government buildings – Richmond House, Wellington House and a third Whitehall property – and take rent from the UK government for their use.

However, the small print of the deal means that the buildings must be run according to the principles of sharia law. Any attempt to serve alcohol in the buildings could lead to a conflict with investors. …

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/aug/06/mps-wanted-to-nationalise-westminster-pub-for-their-own-use

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Accountability, Local Enterprise Partnership, Transparency

Something rotten in the nuclear procurement industry?

It seems to be our very, very bad luck that our Local Enterprise Partnership is so heavily represented by people in the nuclear procurement arena.

The winning bidder in the court case below, in a process found by the judge to be very, very seriously flawed, was a consortium (CFP) that included our old friend Babcock via its Cavendish Nuclear subsidiary:

“CFP is a joint venture between the UK’s Cavendish Nuclear, part of Babcock International, and US-based Fluor Corporation. … ”

Here is a damning summary of the judgment, including a scathing attack on the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority’s transparency:

Energy Solutions wins landmarks public procurement challenge

29 July 2016 – UK
On 29 July 2016, judgment was handed down in the much-anticipated case of Energy Solutions EU Ltd v Nuclear Decommissioning Authority. The result, that Energy Solutions is entitled to damages as a result of errors made by the NDA [Nuclear Decommissioning Agency] in the evaluation process, will be welcomed by suppliers to the public sector struggling with the difficult decision whether to challenge a seemingly questionable tender award.

What was the dispute about?

The dispute relates to the procurement of a major contract for the decommissioning of a number of nuclear facilities. Energy Solutions was part of a consortium (RSS) that bid for the contract, but was unsuccessful. Energy Solutions questioned and subsequently challenged the award, on the basis that there had been ‘manifest errors’ in the evaluation process, and that its consortium should have instead been awarded the contract. Energy Solutions did not, as is usually the case in procurement challenges, issue proceedings within the statutory ‘standstill period’. As a result, the NDA was able to, and did, enter into a contract with the winning bidder, and Energy Solutions was left having to claim damages, rather than seeking to have the tender exercise re-run or the contract awarded to it.

NDA challenged this approach at the interim stage, arguing that by failing to issue proceedings within the standstill period, Energy Solutions had failed to mitigate its loss, or had broken the chain of causation. That argument failed at the preliminary issues stage and subsequently at the Court of Appeal, and the case proceeded to trial.

What did the Court decide?

Fraser J, giving judgment, found that there had indeed been manifest errors by those evaluating the bids. Had the bids been evaluated properly, he found, the winning bidder should have in fact been disqualified, under the NDA’s own evaluation criteria; alternatively, Energy Solutions’ consortium should have been scored higher and should have been awarded the contract. The question of quantum of damages will be decided separately, in a decision that will be watched with interest given the rarity of a successful claim for damages (rather than annulment, for example) in a procurement challenge.

The case has generated a number of other points of interest for suppliers, authorities and lawyers alike. Energy Solutions challenged the NDA’s approach to preserving and providing records. In a previous hearing, the court upheld the NDA’s right to claim legal privilege over documents generated by its solicitors in relation to the carrying out of the evaluation exercise (which Energy Solutions had argued was a commercial, rather than a legal, role). However, Fraser J noted that the withholding of these records meant that, in some instances, there was an omission in the evidence on the decision-making. This, he held, did not assist the NDA in defending Energy Solutions’ claim. The judge was even more critical of the NDA’s approach to the making and retaining of notes relating to the evaluation exercise, finding that this left certain important issues being dealt with “in a manner that is wholly contrary to the obligation of transparency.”

The case also took a dramatic last-minute turn, when it transpired shortly before judgment was to be handed down that Energy Solutions had agreed to pay certain of its witnesses a “bonus” payment if it were successful. After learning of this, the NDA applied for the case to be struck out or retried as a result. Having heard further submissions and cross-examination of those witnesses, though, the judge declined to order this. Although such payments are not allowed under English law, he held that the correct approach would be to look again at the evidence given by those witnesses and decide whether a different result would have been reached had that evidence been excluded. Fraser J concluded that the result would have been the same.

What does this mean for suppliers?

The judgment is highly detailed, and we will be reporting further on the issues that it raises for suppliers to the public sector. However, one thing that is clear is that this will give encouragement to those challenging awards that, in addition to seeking to prevent the contract being entered into or having the tender re-run, a claim for damages may well be a viable option.

http://www.osborneclarke.com/connected-insights/blog/energy-solutions-wins-landmarks-public-procurement-challenge/

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Accountability, DCC, Democracy, EDDC, Hugo Swire, Transparency

Bring back regular public meetings with politicians and public servants!

An article in today’s Guardian suggests that we need more accountability and transparency from those in public office and suggests that one way to do this is to ensure that our public servants and politicians are put on the spot more often by being expected to attend regular public meetings to explain themselves.

Not the carefully scripted and whipped official committee meetings, where the agenda is tightly controlled and policed, when many of them keep quiet and vote or act like sheep – but situations where they must think on their feet and tell us what they REALLY think (if they think at all).

Imagine if, say once a month, an individual councillor or officer or MP had to be available in the community to answer questions from local electors without warning of what those questions might be!

A few would definitely acquit themselves well – but a great majority in East Devon would definitely be floundering at the first question and thereafter!

An intriguing idea!

” … But social media have not destroyed the public meeting. They have done the opposite. Twitter, Facebook and the rest are indirectly responsible for the glorious revival of the gathering where real people meet in a physical place. For some of us, sitting behind a computer is not enough. We need to get out. What is beyond doubt is that the old-fashioned forum of the public meeting is back and is the perfect counter to social media.

…
For at least two decades, politicians assumed that a soundbite on the TV news bulletin was what mattered. Oratory as a part of the repertoire disappeared. Politics became technocratic rather than the art form it partly must be. The glory of the public meeting is that there is no escape. A speaker must deliver. The audience is composed of real people. The speaker cannot hide away tweeting alone in a room. People want to be there and need to be there, to be together out of curiosity or as part of what they see as a cause. … ”

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/aug/03/new-big-thing-politics-old-style-public-meeting-labour-battleground-live-events

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Accountability, Independent Councillors, Transparency

Paul Hayward: independent councillor and a top parish clerk!

“All Saints Parish Council has been given Quality Foundation status – one of only six local authorities in Devon to achieve the accolade.

The award from the National Association of Local Councils (NALC) demonstrates that the authority has the required documentation and information in place for operating lawfully and according to standard practice.

The council also has policies for training its councillors and officers and so has the foundations for improvement and development in place.”

http://www.midweekherald.co.uk/news/all_saints_parish_council_gains_top_award_1_4640681

Wonder why only six councils in Devon have reached this status?

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Accountability, Hinkley C

EDF board member resigns as company expected to vote to construct Hinkley C

“A board member of the French energy giant EDF has resigned ahead of a vote to give the green light to construction of the controversial Hinkley Point nuclear power station in Somerset.

Gerard Magnin, one of 18 board members, quit today saying that the £18bn project is too financially risky for EDF and will divert France away from investment in renewable energy.

Is support for Hinkley nuclear plant Philip Hammond’s first bad move?
The resignation of Magnin, who has a background in alternative energy, is not expected to derail EDF’s approval for the project today.

But it signals growing doubts about Hinkley Point and the financial capacity for EDF to deliver the UK’s first new nuclear power station in 20 years.

The firm’s chief financial officer, Thomas Piqemal, resigned in March over the project, saying it would jeopardise EDF’s financial situation.

“As a board member proposed by the government shareholder, I no longer want to support a strategy that I do not agree with,” Magnin wrote in a letter to EDF chief executive Jean-Bernard Levy which has been seen by Reuters.

EDF is listed on the French stock exchange but the French state retains an 81 per cent stake.

When the project to build a state-of-the art European Pressurized Reactor (EPR) on the Somerset coast was originally outlined in October 2014 EDF was only supposed to take a 50 per cent stake.

The rest was supposed to be financed by Chinese state companies and another majority state-owned French-nuclear engineering firm Areva.

But Areva has subsquently stumbled financially and its nuclear unit has been absorbed by EDF. And the Chinese have said they will fund no more than a third of the project, leaving EDF to finance 66 per cent of Hinkely Point.

Since January 2015 EDF’s share price has fallen by 50 per cent and its market capitalisation is just €22bn, less than the entire Hinkley Point project value.

The company, which has €37.4bn of debt, also needs to spend €50bn to upgrade its French nuclear plants over the next decade.

“Let’s hope that Hinkley Point will not drag EDF in the same abyss as Areva” said Magnin in his letter.

EDF unions have six seats on the board and have suggested they might vote against the Hinkley Point investment, arguing that it could jeopardise the company’s future.

The Hinkley Point reactor is also controversial in the UK as the UK government has agreed to buy electricity from the plant for 35 years at a price that is more than twice current market rates.”

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/edf-hinkley-point-c-nuclear-power-station-vote-decision-latest-news-energy-a7160151.html

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Accountability, Devolution, Hinkley C, Local Enterprise Partnership

Hinkley C doesn’t make sense

And yet our Local Enterprise Partnership and its devolution deal puts it at the heart of their plans – not surprising given the nuclear interests of several LEP members:

” … Hinkley C had been described as “the most expensive object on Earth” many months before the National Audit Office (NAO) revealed that subsidies would be nearly five times as big as had been previously advertised. The avalanche of subsidies has produced an ongoing state aid dispute with the UK launched by Austria, a new state aid investigation by the European commission into the reactor builder Areva, and a potential state aid dispute over France’s plans to make up EDF’s credit shortfall on the project.

Hinkley C has now become so uneconomic that it has been condemned in editorials in the normally pro-nuclear Times, Telegraph and Mail, and many EDF executives and employees think it might be a bad enough plan to completely destroy the state-owned utility.

On Thursday EDF’s board will make a widely trailed decision on whether to proceed with this “investment”. After years of delay, this unseemly hurry looks a bit like panic.

The tide has been turning against Hinkley ever since the problems at Olkiluoto in Finland and Flammanville in France, Hinkley’s elder siblings, became horribly apparent. Now, with a new UK government not so publicly committed to the project, EDF may be feeling that its chances of getting Hinkley built are likely to diminish even more quickly. Osborne seemed willing to countenance almost anything in his desperation to get his legacy built, but Philip Hammond might look at thte figures and the alternatives, and start looking for a way out.

To be clear, the Hinkley subsidies are not bungs to power brokers or inexplicable government largesse; Hinkley’s problems are so severe and so numerous that it requires potentially illegally high levels of state support in order for it to be built. Listing them all – the legal risks, the engineering risks, the liability risks, the credit risks, the safety risks – would take so long there would probably be some new ones before I’d finished. But they all spring from a reactor design, which has so far proved impossible to make work, and has even been described as “unconstructable” by an engineering professor.”

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/27/hinkley-point-c-no-more-than-doomed-attempt-face-saving?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Accountability, Developers/ Development, EDDC, Exmouth, Freedom of Information Act, Moirai Exmouth project, Regeneration

EDDC – Exmouth: searching questions about relationship with former ” preferred partner”

“Dear East Devon District Council,

I make this request under the FOI Act and Environmental regs

We have learned from local press reports that EDDC has ended the status of Moirai Capital Investments as preferred partner in relation to the regeneration of Exmouth.

Has council made any payments to Moirai, or any agent on their behalf (JLL?) and if so, what are the details.

What meetings have been held with Moirai or any of it’s agents and what officer time or other costs have been incurred. Full details please , to include dates, place of meeting and officers/members meeting.

Is it correct that EDDC has been taking councillors (and any others e.g regeneration panel members) to view Moirai’s Swindon operation? Full details please.

When did EDDC decide to end it’s preferred partner relationship with Moirai and why? please supply full reasons and dates with copies of reports and decisions .

Please explain what has changed, other than the passage of time, that necessitates a rethink on regeneration proposals.

Please ensure that the fullest details are given in response together with copies of all relevant paperwork, emails etc.”

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/payments_to_moirai_capital_inves

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Accountability, Devolution, Economy, Local Enterprise Partnership, Post-Brexit Adjustments, Transparency

South-West MPs much more worried about devolution deal than councillors or LEP

“Devon and Somerset councils are reaching a critical stage in their bid for devolved powers, as they decide whether or not to accept a new combined authority model.

All 17 councils involved in the joint devolution bid are required to vote on the proposals, before leaders can progress with negotiations over the summer. It is hoped this could see a deal announced in time for the Autumn statement – but there are concerns among MPs that the current bid lacks clarity.

South West Devon MP Gary Streeter, said he and fellow MPs “greatly recognise and applaud” the work that Devon and Somerset councils have put in so far. But at the moment they have “more questions than answers”. “I think over the next two to three months, when we sit down with the new secretary of state and council leaders, we’re looking for those questions to be answered,” he said. “This is not the fault of the councils, it’s the fault of Government [that] it is still slightly vague and up in the air. “We’re not hostile, we’re just cautious at this stage, and want these questions to be answered. “We want more information about what the benefits will be to our constituents.”

To date, the Conservative Government has awarded 12 devolution deals to cities and regions across the UK. These have passed down greater control over a range of local services, including public health, transport and education.

Devon and Somerset councils collaborated with local national parks, CCGs and the Heart of the South West (HotSW) LEP to submit a joint bid in February. And following their most recent meeting with former local government secretary Greg Clark, they seem optimistic they will secure a deal. However, any progress rests on the individual district, unitary and county councils supporting the creation of a new combined authority (CA) for the region.

The proposal has already been voted through by a number of local authorities – including Exeter, Plymouth and Somerset – with Devon County Council due to vote on Thursday.

Somerset County Council leader John Osman believes the CA model present a far more suitable option than the alternative of a directly elected mayor. And he wants to clarify that it “will not take any powers or responsibilities” from the existing councils. “There is no appetite for a directly elected mayor in the Devon and Somerset area, so the Government have asked for an alternative,” he said.

“What [the combined authority] means is a board with one representative from every one of the 17 councils, the NHS and national parks, who will decide on the new powers and new responsibilities given. “It wont be a new bureaucracy or anything like that, [and] it wont be a massive committee of everybody. It will be 23 people around the room, one from each authority.”

If the proposals are accepted, Devon and Somerset will become the first region to receive devolved powers through a non-mayoral CA model. However, any progress rests on the individual district, unitary and county councils supporting the creation of a new combined authority (CA) for the region.

The proposal has already been voted through by a number of local authorities – including Exeter, Plymouth and Somerset – with Devon County Council due to vote on Thursday.

Somerset County Council leader John Osman believes the CA model present a far more suitable option than the alternative of a directly elected mayor. And he wants to clarify that it “will not take any powers or responsibilities” from the existing councils. “There is no appetite for a directly elected mayor in the Devon and Somerset area, so the Government have asked for an alternative,” he said. “What [the combined authority] means is a board with one representative from every one of the 17 councils, the NHS and national parks, who will decide on the new powers and new responsibilities given. “It wont be a new bureaucracy or anything like that, [and] it wont be a massive committee of everybody. It will be 23 people around the room, one from each authority.”

If the proposals are accepted, Devon and Somerset will become the first region to receive devolved powers through a non-mayoral CA model.

Leaders are hoping that all councils will be on side with the proposals by the end of July, to enable them to start further negotiations with Whitehall over the summer. Their next aim is to have a draft deal from the Government for local authorities to vote on by the end of October. They believe this could lead to an official deal being announced in November’s Autumn Statement.

Councillor Osman admits that the recent cabinet reshuffle – which saw Greg Clark replaced by Sajid Javid – has created some uncertainty. But he says it remains his ambition “to get a deal done and dusted by November time”. “We are now getting into contact with the new secretary of state and the chancellor to say we are still on track and working with civil servants,” he said. “We need to hear back from them to ensure they are still carrying on with the previous administrations line. “I can’t think why he wouldn’t to be honest, it was a conservative policy. But we’ve made contact and we’ve just got it wait for a response.”

The HotSW bid asks for a range of powers, including greater control over road and rail investment, more influence over house building and land use, and better integration of health and social care. Similar responsibilities have been devolved to other areas, including Cornwall, but only authorities with mayors have gained significant control over health budgets and business rates. The additional funding allocated to fund devolution also varies from deal to deal, starting from £15 million a year in Lincolnshire, to £36 million in the West Midlands.

At a Plymouth City Council meeting earlier this month, Labour councillor Tudor Evans called for a “serious conversation” about money. He argued the South West deal must not “set up the combined authority… for a fall”. He told the council chamber: “We’ve known for along time things like adult social care… health services… public health [are] inadequately funded. “We must use this… to unlock the bad funding formulae that have consigned us to not doing the best we can for too many years.”

Coun. Osman states that “the devil is in the detail” when it comes to finances. But he is confident that as councils take on new responsibilities from Government “funding will hopefully follow”. “If not, there is an inkling that we will be able to get some other sources of funding well,” he said. “Not council tax rises or anything like that, but money from central government or business rate rises.”

An area of underlying tension throughout the development of the bid has been geography, with Government keen for bids to focus on LEP boundaries. However, there are those who argue an authority which straddles multiple cities and counties will lack the sense of unity and identity enjoyed by somewhere like Cornwall. Other large multi-authority bids have come close to unravelling, with the East Anglia deal eventually being split into two after Cambridgeshire County Council rejected plans.

Gary Streeter points out that while the tendency in Somerset is “to look Eastwards toward Bristol and London”, in Devon the natural instinct is to look West toward Cornwall. “Most of us feel that… the region should be Devon and Cornwall, but we seem to have gone past that point,” he said. “Some people feel more strongly about it than others, particularly I think the Somerset MPs…. but is not necessarily a deal breaker. “There seems to be broad support for establishing Devon and Somerset. And there is support for a combined authority, provided we know how its going to work and its not simply adding another tier of government.”

Coun. Osman believes a break-up of the Devon and Somerset alliance is “unlikely”, adding that ministers are “pleased” that the 23 authorities have remained united. He said council leaders and staff will work hard over coming months to make the most of an opportunity to “shape the agenda for the South West”.

Mr Streeter is more reserved, suggesting that the new secretary of state may want to take a fresh look at the devolution agenda. He states that a November timetable “is a possibility” but “a lot of water has got to flow under that bridge yet”, and MPs will get a vote on the final deal. “Over the next two or three months… the detail [of the deal] is likely to change and emerge, so I think people shouldn’t get too hung up on the detail,” he added. “My own feeling is that with the new secretary of state coming in… some of the slight vagueness of the current proposal will be addressed.”

At a glance: What is a combined authority?

The 17 Devon and Somerset councils making a joint bid for devolution have been asked to support a new combined authority in order to progress to a deal.

Councillors stress this is not an attempt to merge authorities, or to take powers from lower tier councils– but there is potential for this to change.

Ministers first legislated for the creation of combined authorities in 2009, to allow councils to pool resources for the delivery of local services.

Their powers were enhanced by the passage of the recent Cities and Local Government Devolution Act, and the model has subsequently been taken up in a number of areas bidding for devolution.

In areas like Great Manchester and the Liverpool City Region, they have opted to establish CAs under the control of an elected mayor. However, the Heart of the South West (HotSW) region could be one of the first areas to secure a devolution package with a non-mayoral CA.

As proposals currently stand, the Devon and Somerset CA would be made up of one member from each council, national park, Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) and the Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) involved with the bid. Council leaders claim it will not be a physical entity or a “new bureaucracy,” but will simply be a way to coordinate the distribution of new funds and powers throughout the region.

The aim is to improve oversight without resorting to a directly elected mayor system, which many see as unsuitable for a region as large and diverse as Devon and Somerset. However, reports state that it is possible to change to a mayoral CA at a later date, and for powers to be transferred from lower tier councils “subject to agreement”.

http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/devon-and-somerset-on-cusp-of-devolution-deal-but-mps-want-more-clarity/story-29549453-detail/story.html

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Accountability, Democracy, Spin, Standards Committee, Transparency

Comments

“Post-truth’ politics are a debasement of standards in public life”

“Verbal dexterity, inconsistency and ‘spin’ are part and parcel of normal politics but the exaggerations and distortions of the EU referendum campaign has led to concerns about ‘post-truth’ politics.

Nicholas Allen and Sarah Birch write there is a need for someone to provide a moral lead, and argue the Committee for Standards in Public Life could play a valuable role by establishing some relevant basic markers. …

… current trends, first identified in the context of US politics and more recently in the context of British politics, risk stretching beyond breaking-point a basic commitment to truth and honesty that is essential for liberal democracy. Without it, citizens cannot hope to achieve ‘enlightened understanding’ and learn about what best serve their interests, one of five criteria identified by Robert Dahl that define modern democratic government. Someone in government, or at least in officialdom, needs to take note. Someone needs to provide a moral lead. …

… Morality in politics needs to come from somewhere. The CSPL [Committee for Standards in Public Life] is charged with overseeing standards in public life. The new prime minister should give it the resources and remit to do just this.

‘Post-truth’ politics are a debasement of standards in public life

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Accountability, Consultation, EDDC, Spin

EDDC “Communications”: pigs, flying, sky …. and ” avoiding the barking mad”!

Here is the introduction to EDDC’s new communications policy:

“Communications Plan 2016-2020

… Purpose and scope of the communications plan

This plan aims to ensure we have good communications which improve residents’ lives, keep them informed and help them access services more easily.

This plan will help develop EDDC’s brand so that it becomes instantly recognisable and synonymous with our council plan priorities, values and key drivers of great customer service and value for money services in an outstanding place.

The more we involve and tell people about what we are doing and why, the better more informed they will feel. We have a great story to tell and we need to tell it well – this means effectively and consistently. …

Addressing local priorities

This plan aims to deliver effective communications to our customers. We strongly believe that customers who are informed about our services and benefits are more positive in their view of the Council than those who are not so informed.

Our Council Plan outlines that we will ‘continuously improve to be an outstanding council’ and that we will ‘prioritise keeping our residents informed’.

This communication plan will support the communication of the priorities and outcomes in the Council Plan:

 Encouraging communities to be outstanding
 Developing an outstanding local economy
 Delivering and promoting our outstanding environment
 Continuously improving to be an outstanding council

Principles underpinning this action plan:
 Communication and reputation management is a top-table issue

It’s about avoiding the ‘barking mad’ by thinking about everything we do and everything we say/don’t say from a reputation management perspective

 Stop talking about ‘they’ and start talking about ‘we’!

 We are all responsible for reputation management and communications.

 We think about different audiences: residents, members, officers, towns and
parishes, partners, business groups. …”

Click to access 280616-overview-agenda-combined.pdf

Whoops, big omission: they missed out developers from the last sentence!

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Accountability, Devolution, EDDC, Local Enterprise Partnership, Scrutiny, Spin, Transparency

Devolution: Horses, carts, stable doors …

EDDC issues a press release on 21 July 2016 saying that on 13 July 2016 its Cabinet decided to press ahead with devolution plans:

http://www.midweekherald.co.uk/news/cabinet_agrees_to_continue_east_devon_devolution_talks_in_principle_1_4625365

THEN

the Overview Committee discusses it on 28 July:

Click to access 280616-overview-agenda-combined.pdf

And STILL we are not allowed our say!

Priceless.

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Accountability, Devolution, East Devon Alliance, EDDC, Independent Councillors, Local Enterprise Partnership, Transparency

EDDC votes to continue devolution deal despite absence of consultation and facts

Talks on the devolution of power from Westminster to East Devon will continue ‘in principle’ amid calls for a public consultation and more concrete facts.

If successful, the Heart of the South West (HOTSW) bid would see local authorities work with the Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) to take on more responsibility for economic growth and infrastructure in the region.

East Devon District Council’s cabinet agreed to carry on the conversation in principle at a meeting last Wednesday (July 13) but there was a consensus that more ‘concrete facts’ are needed.

[Independent, East Devon Alliance] Councillor Cathy Gardner said: “One thing that has concerned me since the beginning of this process is the complete absence of a public consultation. It could have a huge impact. It would be remiss of us to take this forward without seeing what people want.” EDDC’s full council will need to give the final go-ahead to continue talks.”

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Economy

National Audit Office: “Government has ‘no coherent framework’ for implementing policy”

“The government lacks a “coherent, enduring framework” for planning and managing policy implementation, according to the National Audit Office.

In two reports published today, the NAO assessed the means by which the government plans and manages its business through Single Department Plans, and the execution of the 2015 Spending Review.

Almost £2tn was allocated to departments in last year’s Spending Review and another £2tn was budgeted for welfare and benefits payments over five years. This involved complex cooperation between the centre of government and departments to set overall strategy.

Despite improvements in this area, auditors found that the government was lacking an overall management framework. Adopting such a system would allow the government to plan into the medium term, set achievable goals, know whether it is on track, adjusting its approach where necessary, and provide Parliament with clear accountability.

The NAO refuted the government’s claims that it already operates such an arrangement in the form of processes and guidelines. The auditors said this did not add up to a framework, and said the outcome of this lack of structure could be seen in projects that were not value for money and blighted by an absence of long-term, joined-up thinking.

Making the change to a more effective system would not be easy, however, due to the scale of government and the significant challenges facing the country, which have been compounded by the recent vote to leave the EU.

Some progress had been made following previous NAO and Public Accounts Committee probes, but improvements had not been as significant as expected. Although the government is working with departments more effectively, it is not making the most of in-house expertise. Also, the report noted that a heightened focus on the spending period up to 2020 had drawn attention away from longer-term funding decisions and their impact.

NAO head Amyas Morse said: “Time and again, we find that problems in the delivery of public services can be traced back to the way government goes about planning and managing business in pursuit of an administration’s policy objectives.” …

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2016/07/government-has-no-coherent-framework-implementing-policy

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Accountability, Democracy, Hugo Swire, Labour ( Devon), Lobbying, Spin

Should political lobbyists be allowed to become MPs?

“Owen Smith, who now faces Jeremy Corbyn in the Labour leadership battle, worked as a lobbyist in the pharmaceutical industry for five years before becoming the MP for Pontypridd in 2010.

After working for the US giant Pfizer, Smith moved to the controversial biotech firm Amgen in 2008. At the time, Amgen was battling an investigation into one of its most successful anaemia drugs, Aranesp.

Amgen was ultimately fined $762m for illegally promoting the drug to cancer patients in a way that increased the likelihood of their deaths. Amgen was hit with the fines after it emerged that the California company was “pursuing profits at the risk of patient safety” as it promoted a non-approved use of Aranesp.

Smith was in charge of corporate affairs, corporate and internal communications and public affairs at the British division of Amgen while the biotech company was being investigated.

The main whistleblower on Aranesp filed her case against Amgen in 2006, sparking a US investigation that took several years to conclude. The whistleblower also claimed that Amgen systematically overfilled vials of the drugs, when selling them in America, which enabled doctors to “pool” the excess amounts.

The doctors were then encouraged to bill Medicare and private insurers for the use of the excess drug, creating a system of “liquid kickbacks” according to one lawyer on the case.

Amgen also produces a drug called erythropoietin – better known as EPO – which it produced under its Epogen brand name. Epogen was connected to the international cycling scandal, which involved cyclists such as Lance Armstrong. …”

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jul/19/owen-smith-worked-as-pr-chief-for-biotech-firm-hit-by-762m-fine

David Cameron was “Director of Corporate Affairs” at Carlton TV (i.e. a lobbyist):

“In July 1994, Cameron left his role as Special Adviser to work as the Director of Corporate Affairs at Carlton Communications. Carlton, which had won the ITV franchise for London weekdays in 1991, was a growing media company which also had film-distribution and video-producing arms. Cameron was suggested for the role to Carlton executive chairman Michael P. Green by his later mother-in-law Lady Astor. Cameron left Carlton to run for Parliament in 1997, returning to his job after his defeat.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Cameron#Carlton

and our own dear Hugo Swire had a similar job at the National Gallery:

“He was a financial consultant, then became of Head of Development for the National Gallery, then Director of the auction house Sotheby’s directly before his election from 1996.”

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hugo_Swire#Career

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Accountability, AONB, Environment (local), Flooding, Rural communities

The price of nature or the value of nature: Leadsom to decide

“Ministers must deliver on a manifesto pledge for a 25-year plan to boost nature and cut the costs of environmental damage, it has been urged.

Harm caused by floods, air pollution, water pollution and chemicals in the atmosphere are adding billions of pounds a year to bills, insurance premiums and costs for businesses, farms and households, environmentalists warn.

But after the Brexit vote, there is uncertainty whether environmental protections provided by the European Union will be maintained.

And the promised 25-year plan for the environment has been delayed, the Wildfowl and Wetlands Trust (WWT) said.

Air pollution costs the UK an estimated £15-20bn a year, flood damage £1.4bn, water pollution can add up to 17% on consumer bills, £129m is spent cleaning farm run-off from water supplies and farmers incur an extra £180m in growing costs a year due to chemicals in the air.

But efforts to protect nature would deliver significant economic and social benefits, a report by WWT said.

For example, creating 100,000 hectares of new wetlands from restoring upland peat and coastal salt marshes to creating “pocket ponds” in cities could reduce flooding, purify water, save money and improve mental health.

The report urges the government to deliver on the 25-year plan, and to make itself accountable to parliament by producing an annual budget statement on the value of nature alongside the value of the economy.

Ministers should also ensure UK environmental protection is as strong or stronger after Brexit and appoint “catchment commissioners” to co-ordinate a joined-up approach in each area and reward action across the landscape, it said.

WWT is also calling for ministers to establish guidance and accreditation for organisations providing “green prescriptions” which give access to nature to deliver affordable benefits to physical and mental health.

Opposition parties have backed the call for the government to keep its promise for a 25-year plan for the environment.

They urged ministers to commit to consulting on a plan which sets out strong policies, with long term legally-binding targets to improve the environment, maintains protection after Brexit, and ensures international co-operation on the issue.

In a joint statement, Lib Dem leader Tim Farron, shadow environment secretary Rachael Maskell and Green party MP Caroline Lucas warned “our environment must not be a victim of short-term political unrest”.

WWT chief executive, Martin Spray, said: “We all end up paying for environmental damage through higher prices and taxes, as well as the social and health costs of Britain being a less healthy place to live.

“Our recommendation is remarkably simple. Make the government accountable to parliament for the value of the environment as well as the economy. Transparency will drive improvement.

He added: “This is a key early test for the new prime minister.

“Will she deliver a manifesto commitment to value our environment? And in a post-Brexit Britain she has another question to answer: Will she commit to environmental protection improving on – or at least being equal to – that provided by the EU?”

A Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) spokeswoman said: “Developing a 25-year plan for the environment is a Conservative manifesto commitment and a priority for this department.

“While the precise nature of the plan may change now the UK has decided to leave the EU, we will seize this opportunity to consider our long-term vision for the environment and work with a range of interests to determine and deliver it.”

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/19/uk-government-must-deliver-on-25-year-environmental-pledge?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Accountability, Democracy, EDDC, Knowle/Honiton/Exmouth relocation, Standards Committee, Transparency

EDDC: cost of officer time – selective monitoring and double standards for the Standards Committee

Isn’t it interesting that, in just about every area of EDDC’s work, the cost of officer time is not included. Take the Knowle relocation – officer time is NEVER costed. Take planning applications and the production of the Local Plan – officer time is NEVER costed.

Yet, when it comes to monitoring the behaviour of councillors, somehow officer time can be costed. Why? Because EDDC wants to subtly suggest that it costs an awful lot of money and really people should not be wasting their precious time as most complaints are dismissed by the Monitoring Officer anyway!

“The annual cost for assessing Monitoring Officer type complaints remains at approximately £40,000, which has been calculated based on an estimate of officers’ time spent assessing, investigating and administering complaints as part of their job role. Officers dealing with the Code of Conduct complaints process are:
Monitoring Officer; Deputy Monitoring Officer, PA to Monitoring Officer, Democratic Services Officer, statutory Independent Person role (of which EDDC has used two on an alternate basis) and Investigating Officer when required.”

Click to access 190716standardscttecombinedagenda.pdf

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Accountability, Cornwall, DCC, Devolution, Economy, Education (local), Post-Brexit Adjustments, Rural communities, Small and Medium businesses, Transparency

Comments

Brexit: where now for Devon and Cornwall businesses?

Devon and Cornwall Business Council:

… “1) DEVOLUTION. This process may be very welcome to the business community (or it may not). There has been inadequate consultation for us to know what the implications might be. Either way it will create a period of uncertainty. We cannot afford to risk this whilst so many critical matters are up in the air. I propose that we ask for, at least, a 12 month moratorium whilst clarity is restored. Then we need a proper period of consultation knowing what we then know. Devolution has the potential to provide significant opportunities for devolved administrations to determine their own future when it comes to skills, transport, investment and development, but this agenda needs to be developed collaboratively with the private sector standing shoulder to shoulder with Government.

2) EUROPEAN MARKETS. More than 50% of South West trade is with near Europe. There have been some bold statements that 90% of trading opportunities will be outside the EU in the next 10-15 years. Many, however, of our investors are based in Europe – IMERYS, EDF Energy, Sibelco, Princes Yachts, Plymouth Gin, Barden Corporation to name but a few. Decisions are made in European capitals which affect a large number of our jobs and future growth prospects. We need to ensure that the existing investments are maintained and that we will feature in future investment decisions – access to the Single Market is vital. UK Trade and Industry (UKTI) department officials are already fully stretched (inadequate funding currently, with an increasing workload), we need to establish our own business trade ambassadors to ensure direct contacts are maintained and developed. From this base we can then begin to start creating a forward order book for whatever new trade agreements might emerge. This will also allow a programme to be developed to enable access into new global markets.

3) INFRASTRUCTURE. The South West has for too long been the Cinderella of the UK in terms of infrastructure investment. We have clearly supported plans for future spending on road, rail, air, marine and broadband projects. We must now directly lobby for these, acting as a single voice and ensuring that our South West MPs are lobbied to also speak with one voice. What, however, will make this happen is a demonstration that investment in infrastructure will result in direct business investment. We need to clearly demonstrate what we will contribute in return.

4) PLAY TO OUR STRENGTHS. Some of our most successful business sectors should be the subject of focussed programmes for ambitious expansion – food and drink, tourism and e-health are good examples of where the South West has specialist skills. Add to these; marine / maritime technology, aerospace / space, advanced engineering, digital and creative economy. Designed and co-ordinated tasks forces could achieve spectacular results in these areas of the economy.

5) GOVERNANCE/REGULATION. The system of regulation has been often complained about as a barrier to business growth – red tape, EU regulations or Gold plating from Whitehall? Staffing levels at regulators have been cut making the problems more acute. The establishment of voluntary codes and working partnerships led by trade bodies and self-regulated by them (with rewards for best practise) could greatly improve the current confrontational systems which have become entrenched – particularly in areas such as planning and environmental health.

6) PRODUCTIVITY. We have routinely lagged behind the average UK productivity levels (between 15-20% lower than UK average for Devon and Cornwall1). There are many drivers of productivity; investment, innovation, skills, enterprise and competition. This problem can be partly addressed by self-help. Simple work based systems can achieve significant improvements to outputs (and profits). These include Lean Production techniques. Training for all staff on digital skills and improvements to work/life balance (flexible working hours) which can reduce lost time off through stress / illness.

7) YOUNG BUSINESS. The Business Community has a collective responsibility to re-engage with the next generation to ensure we have attracted the huge talents of our young people. Business support can start by involvement as a Governor at Primary School all the way through to being a voluntary mentor for new start businesses. There are also great opportunities for assisting with work experience. The SW is blessed with some exceptional people with invaluable skills and experience. This should be high on the business agenda.

8) INNOVATION/SKILLS. We are proud of our Universities and Further Education Colleges. They deliver with national and international standards. The ground breaking research they produce is helping to change things around the world. We complain about a lack of relevant skills; however, do we fully engage with these institutions? Do we share with them our future business plans so that skill sets can be anticipated? Do we share with them our challenges in order to co-develop innovative solutions? Do we respond to their outreach work which can tackle production/system deficiencies? The answer is we could all do better. New partnerships should be formed as a priority. In part focusing on achieving young people with relevant skills (matched to growth sectors) through apprenticeships which, have the potential to greatly reduce our reliability on skilled labour from outside the UK, EU or otherwise.

9) URBAN/RURAL. For too long we have allowed ourselves to get sucked into Whitehall speak on the growth of Cities. Seen from the Whitehall bubble this is the best place to concentrate investment decisions. What we are missing by not forging strong urban/rural partnerships represents one of the greatest untapped opportunities for the growth of our economy – natural energy, local food production, health and well-being, water quality, flood/climate change management are all on our doorstep. DCBC will spearhead a rolling programme of partnership opportunities.

10) FUNDNG. The expectation that Government cash will still arrive as before is fool’s gold. Austerity will get worse before it gets better. Business will become even more important in the funding of growth opportunities. This could include matched funding with Devolved Authorities and perhaps taking advantage of cheap Government borrowing. We must set out our investment priorities more clearly and take these to our key stakeholders in the public sector for early discussions in order that improved delivery be achieved.”

http://www.dcbc.co.uk/news/brexit-where-next-business-community-10-point-recovery-plan#

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Accountability, Lobbying, Spin, Transparency

Everything changes, nothing changes

“New International Trade Secretary Liam Fox celebrated his government comeback at a Commons champagne party attended by the friend and former associate linked to his previous Cabinet downfall.

Dr Fox and Adam Werritty were among a noisy group who downed eight bottles of bubbly on the Commons terrace, with at least one cork being popped into the River Thames. The event took place within an hour of Dr Fox, 54, being given a key Brexit role in Theresa May’s new Cabinet. His friends queued up to give him congratulatory slaps on the back as he drank £29-a-bottle House of Commons champagne.

The impromptu party, hosted by Commons Deputy Speaker and fellow Tory MP Eleanor Laing, a longstanding friend of Dr Fox and his wife Jesme, was attended by about 20 people. They got through eight bottles over a couple of hours. Mrs Fox was not present.

Dr Fox was forced to resign as Defence Secretary in October 2011 in a row over his dealings with Mr Werritty. The lobbyist did not have security clearance but accompanied Dr Fox on at least 18 foreign business trips.

The resignation came after a week of revelations about Dr Fox’s relationship with Werritty, including disclosures that the friend’s activities were funded by firms and individuals that potentially stood to benefit from government decisions.

At the time, Werritty falsely described himself as one of Dr Fox’s official aides and handed out business cards bearing the Commons portcullis logo. He also took a number of solo trips reportedly with the aim of fostering closer ties between Right-wing politicians in Britain and the United States.

In his resignation letter to the then Prime Minister David Cameron, Dr Fox said he had ‘mistakenly allowed the distinction between my personal interest and my Government activities to become blurred’.

Mr Werritty, 37, best man at Dr Fox’s 2005 wedding, moved into Dr Fox’s spare room in London after graduating from university. Werritty now lives in a flat in Dolphin Square, Pimlico – a mile from the Commons – where many MPs have apartments.

An inquiry cleared Dr Fox of benefiting financially from his links with Werritty.

An MP who saw Dr Fox’s champagne party said: ‘It seemed a bit over the top to celebrate so loudly in full view of members of the public on Westminster Bridge.’

Dr Fox said last night: ‘Adam and his wife were invited by Eleanor.’ He added: ‘My friends are my friends and I’m very loyal to them.’

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3693749/Fox-celebrates-bubbly-old-pal-New-Trade-Secretary-attends-party-ex-associate-linked-previous-downfall.html

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Accountability, Democracy, Lobbying, Transparency

Lobbying

“An influential Conservative member of the House of Lords has been accused of lobbying the government for the benefit of the coal industry, despite previously saying he does not argue for the industry’s interests.

Viscount Matt Ridley, a journalist and businessman, benefits financially from coalmines on his estate and has used his column in the Times newspaper to downplay the seriousness of climate change.

The former chairman of Northern Rock wrote to energy minister Lord Bourne in April to tell him about a Texas-based company with “fascinating new technology, which may well interest the Department of Energy and Climate Change”.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/15/matt-ridley-accused-of-lobbying-uk-government-on-behalf-of-coal-industry