Extreme poverty becoming more common

Extreme poverty – where families are routinely unable to afford regular meals, wash clothes or provide their children with basic items such as beds and sheets – is becoming more common, according to frontline family support workers.

Three-quarters of support professionals such as health visitors and social workers said they had seen an increase in the numbers of families they regularly worked with who experienced destitution and were in need of basic financial support.

Despite more families facing greater difficulties, official support was harder to come by, the survey found. “The only substantive increase in support over the last year was the increase in the number of families support workers have seen using food banks,” it read.

The survey of 1,290 frontline family support workers from 616 organisations across the UK was published by the poverty grants charity Buttle UK. It said it was undertaken to provide a “thermometer reading” of the lives of some the UK’s most vulnerable families.

It comes amid rising concern that alongside headline increases in relative poverty in recent years – more than 4 million children in the UK live below the breadline – a cohort of the very poorest families is experiencing the extreme and intractable form of poverty known as destitution.

Destitution is defined as experience of at least two of six measures over the previous month, including eating fewer than two meals a day for two or more days; or as a weekly income after housing costs of £70 for a single adult or £140 for a couple with children – an amount below which people “cannot meet their core material needs for basic physiological functioning from their own resources”.

Last week, the MPs Frank Field and Heidi Allen warned that austerity cuts meant that the poorest communities were now “blighted by the constant spectre of destitution”. An estimated 1.5 million people in the UK, including 350,00 children, experienced destitution in 2017. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/jul/15/destitution-on-the-rise-say-frontline-family-support-workers?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

“Head of Ofsted calls for greater scrutiny of multi-academy trusts”

Owl says: there are many multi-academy trusts in Devon – unaccountable and unscrutinised by both parents and local authority and nothing either can do about it. Scandalous.

“The chief inspector of schools has called for increased powers to scrutinise multi-academy trusts (Mats), warning that parents and policymakers currently have only a partial view of what is happening in England’s schools.

Amanda Spielman, the head of the schools regulator Ofsted, said trusts were not being held to account properly as her inspectors were not allowed to inspect them.

Ofsted’s inspections are limited to a “summary evaluation” based on a sample of schools belonging to a trust, rather than on the trust itself, resulting in a lack of accountability, according to Spielman.

A growing number of schools in England are being taken out of local authority control and turned into academies, which critics have long claimed lack transparency and local accountability.

About three-quarters of secondary schools and a third of primaries are now academies and three-quarters of those belong to a Mat, some of which control as many as 50 schools or more. “Given the power and influence of Mats, it’s important that they are properly accountable to parents,” said Spielman.

“The fact that Ofsted is unable to inspect trusts directly means parents and policymakers are only given a partial view of what is happening in our schools. This presents some very real risks, which we have seen highlighted by the recent failures of some academy trusts.”

The system of summary evaluations of Mats was introduced this year and allows Ofsted to carry out inspections of a number of schools and publish individual reports. Overall findings are discussed with trust leaders before a summary evaluation report on the work of the Mat is published, though an inspection grade, which would be normal with schools, is not given.

Six Mats have been the subject of summary evaluations, among them the Outwood Grange academies trust, which has in the past been criticised for its discipline policy and high levels of exclusions. Ofsted’s report was positive overall but recommended that the trust should reduce exclusions by continuing to improve pupil behaviour.

Ofted published a report on Monday based on an investigation into Mats, which found that schools in larger trusts benefited from economies of scale, back-office support, training, career progression and recruitment. However, it said some Mats had taken on a large number of struggling schools too quickly, without always having the capacity or leadership necessary to improve them.

A Department for Education spokesperson said the academies programme and the freedom it gave school leaders has been at the heart of the government’s education reforms. “Ofsted have already published a number of summary evaluations reports, which are among a wide range of tools we use to hold academy trusts to account. This includes published information about trust performance, annual accounts and letters to trusts where there are issues of under-performance or weaknesses in governance or financial management.”

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2019/jul/15/head-of-ofsted-calls-for-greater-scrutiny-of-multi-academy-trusts?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

“New PM given stark warning over future of local councils”

“The next prime minister has just 100 days to “save” local government, a think-tank has warned.

In their first 100 days, the new leader must provide a one-year emergency settlement for local government, drop the council tax referendum requirement and come up with a strategy for health and social care funding.

These are the recommendations from the Local Government Information Unit think-tank, whose Local Finance Taskforce paper was published today. The report is based on evidence taken from 254 senior figures in local government.

Jonathan Carr-West, chief executive of LGiU, said: “The next prime minister will have 100 days to save local government when he is elected on 23 July.

“At the moment, councils have no idea how they will be funded this time next year. They face a financial cliff edge on 31 March 2020 and currently have no ability to budget or plan their services for the year ahead.

“Some may soon be forced to take very difficult decisions, based on their worst-case scenario budget estimates – making redundancies, stripping down services, selling valued public assets – that may turn out to be completely unnecessary.”

LGiU noted, from its previous research, that one in 20 councils fear it will be unable to fulfil statutory duties this year, while one in 10 expects to face legal challenges due to service cuts.

The think-tank called on the next prime minister to set out a plan for local government finance that considers overall quantum, uncertainty and risk, adult social care, business rates, council tax and other sources of funding.

On business rates, LGiU noted that despite a commitment to moving to 75% business rates retention by 2020, there is still little detail on how this will be redistributed, and called for a strategy to published “as a matter of urgency”.

The council tax referendum threshold – whereby councils must hold a local referendum on decisions to increase council tax beyond 3% – is “outdated and ripe for removal” the report said.

“Local government deserves better and local government deserves more,” Carr-West concluded.”

https://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2019/07/new-pm-given-stark-warning-over-future-local-councils

Swire hobnobs with Cayman Islands Chief Investment Officer in Cayman Islands this week

“Albert Isola, the Government of Gibraltar’s Minister for Commerce, recently led the Gibraltar delegation to the United Kingdom and Overseas Territories Association (UKOTA) Summit in Grand Cayman. This provided Mr Isola an excellent opportunity to address leaders and senior representatives of the Overseas Territories.

During the visit Minister Isola fulfilled two public speaking engagements. On the opening day he was invited to contribute to a panel discussion moderated by Alan Gemmell and with panellists Rt. Hon. Sir Hugo Swire, MP, Cayman Island Chief Officer, Eric Bush, JP, and Premier, the Hon Sharlene Cartwright Robinson, JP. The session, entitled: “Commonwealth Enterprise and Investment Council” (CWEIC), discussed the commercial opportunities available within the Overseas Territories for growth and expansion in a Commonwealth context. …

Gibraltar’s Fintech credentials showcased at UKOTA Summit

Grant Thornton (EDDC’s auditors) delay Sports Direct results

Owl says: not the first of the big auditors to get caught up in new, tighter regulation and certainly not the last.

“Retail tycoon Mike Ashley spooked investors on Monday after bosses at his tracksuits and trainers empire Sports Direct were forced to delay publication of its full-year results.

The acquisitive group’s highly-anticipated results were due to be published on Thursday but now the City may need to wait until August 23rd to glimpse beneath the bonnet of the firm.

Fearing the worst, investors fled. Shares slid 15 per cent in early trading on Monday to £2.20 – near to a seven-year low and well below the firm’s 2007 flotation price of £3.00. …

It said that its auditors at Grant Thornton need more time to sign off the accounts due to increased regulation and also pointed to ‘uncertainty’ around the future trading performance of House of Fraser, which it bought in a pre-pack administration for £90million last summer.

‘The reasons for the delay are the complexities of the integration into the company of the House of Fraser business, and the current uncertainty as to the future trading performance of this business, together with the increased regulatory scrutiny of auditors and audits,’ the group said. …”

https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/markets/article-7248053/Sports-Direct-shares-slump-billionaire-retail-tycoon-Mike-Ashley-delays-results.html

Times: “Persimmon faults are exposed on TV”

“Pressure is about to return to Persimmon, with a television investigation set to reveal more concerns about the quality of its properties and customer service.

Britain’s New Build Scandal, to be aired tonight on Channel 4 as part of its Dispatches series, will feature an inspection of a new Persimmon home that found 295 faults, 70 per cent of which were so serious that they violated building regulations, including a fire door that did not close, leaking sinks, unsealed showers and faulty waste connections.

Britain’s most profitable housebuilder is responsible for one in seven homes sold via the government-backed Help to Buy mortgage scheme and in February became the first to report an annual profit of more than £1 billion. Based in York and a member of the FTSE 100 index of leading shares, it was embroiled in a pay scandal last year when Jeff Fairburn, 53, chief executive at that time, was awarded £81.6 million under a long-term incentive scheme put together in 2012 and linked to dividends and the share price.

Persimmon apologised to the customers featured in the programme, including two whose home was uninhabitable for three months after buying it. “We fully accept that on too many occasions in the past we have fallen short on customer care and we can and will do better,” it said.

Last month The Times revealed Persimmon had removed complaints about the standard of its homes from Facebook after taking over the administration of a group targeting customers on the social media site.”

Source: Times, pay wall

Sidmouth’s over 55 population expected to grow by 15% by 2041

Inly luxury homeowner retirement properties being built NOT affordable homes for older people with lower incomes:

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/jul/14/lack-of-homes-suitable-for-older-people-fuels-housing-crisis-report?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Exmouth, EDDC and Grenadier – when does a gamekeeper become a poacher?

“Dear East Devon District Council,

[order slightly changed for clarity]

I am writing to request an internal review of East Devon District Council’s handling of my FOI request ‘Was independent advice sought on the governance of Queen’s Drive Exmouth Community Interest Company’.

A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/w…

Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.

Councillor Paul Millar has made some attempt to answer this FOI via Social Media. He provided more detail to my FOI than provided here, in, as I understand it his new role as a director of Queen’s Drive Exmouth Community Interest Company and a Councillor. However, although he asserted this via social media and also announced that there was another new director, according to Companies House, Cllr Stott and Cllr Williamson are still in place.

Are you able to provide more detail on the £200k that Grenadier made a good business case for according to Councillor Millar? Are you also able to clarify the amount of interest chargeable by Grenadier on the loan and other charges that the company is making to the CIC.

There appears to be some splitting of identity here, that may lead to a conflict of interest. For example when is Grenadier acting as a commercial business and when is it acting as the majority shareholder of the CIC? Are you able to offer reassurance and evidence that a valuable community asset is being utilised for community benefit rather than commercial gain?”

When is a public footpath not a public footpath? At Plumb Park, Exmouth

Owl has been passed a copy of a letter (from the writer) sent to EDDC:

“Dear Sir/Madam – I have recently made several visits to this development (EX8 2JB) with a view to our family buying at least 2 purchases there.

On Wed 10th July at around 1230 I attended to see how work was going on and walked the public footpath through the site.

The public footpath runs SSE from Buckingham Close to the vicinity of Green Farm and is marked on OS maps as a Public Right of Way. The building works are all to the south and west of this boundary path.

There was no statutory notice saying that the pathway was closed nor was an advised diversion promulgated. Both these requirements are, I believe, legal requirements, to advise closure.

There were numerous signs warning about the adjacent building site, but from the safety of the public path I was better able to see the areas of build I was interested in. At no time was I in any danger from works vehicles. I passed several workers going to lunch – none of whom commented on my presence.

When I got to the end of the path/works I was rudely shouted at by an operative in a dumper truck who demanded to know what I was doing. I simply replied I was looking at the works from a public footpath. He became more authoritative and aggressive so I walked away on the way back. He then had the effrontery to demand a worker escort me “off the premises”. This chap showed me lots of notices such as “Do not enter site”, “Report to site office” but nothing regarding the public footpath. I pointed out to him the several small statutory yellow discs displaying “Public footpath”. But all to no avail.

So what is the position about this footpath? Why are there no statutory notices closing it – the developers Taylor Wimpey surely cannot unilaterally close it. Indeed is the footpath legally closed at all?

I would have thought a clear notice one way or the other is required.”

[author’s name and contact details given]

Tory Councillor blames Tory Government for abandoning Axminster and pleads with Parish and Swire for help

Axminster Conservative Councillor Ian Hall has challenged the area’s two Conservative MPs to press for more credible support from Westminster after the town suffered another in a series of economic setbacks.

The Conservative district councillor, who was re-elected to represent the town in May, despite his party losing control of East Devon after 45 years, says he feels the Tory administration in Westminster has abandoned the town.

This follows news that the Government has rebuffed Axminster’s application for help from a Future High Streets Fund grant at the second stage.

The former Conservative administration at EDDC applied to Westminster in March for Axminster to receive a share of the £675 million set aside as part of Government’s Our Plan for the High Street.

It became clear that Axminster had lost out when the shortlist of successful bids for up to £150,000 was announced last week, with the nearest places to go forward being Taunton and Yeovil.

Ian Hall said: “Axminster seems to be the forgotten town of East Devon when it comes to any kind of support from Central Government. There’s been a catalogue of decisions going against us, which have left those of us who are working hard to revitalise the town during challenging economic times feeling like nobody in power cares about us.

POSITIVE ACTION

“I’ve now contacted our two local MPs – Neil Parish and Hugo Swire – challenging them to press colleagues in Government to recognise that Axminster will be in dire straits if it doesn’t see some positive action”.

In March, Ian Hall described a Whitehall decision to backtrack on an earlier promise of a £10 million grant for the proposed Axminster Relief Road as a ‘betrayal’ because changing the grant to a loan rendered the entire Axminster Masterplan unviable.

Since then, there’s been more gloom for Axminster, with Goulds announcing an autumn closure of the town’s Trinity House department store and McColls newsagent in Victoria Place expected to cease trading.

An angry Ian Hall said: “Enough is enough. Axminster is fighting for its life at the moment. There are people in this town – and I’m one of them – working incredibly hard to keep ourselves afloat against really tough odds. But all we’re getting from this Government [HIS GOVERNMENT!!!] is one kick in the teeth after another.

FIGHTING

“There’s only so much people here on the ground can do. I’m fighting Axminster’s corner at district and county level. But our local efforts can only make a difference if we get support from central funds. No one at Westminster seems to understand the desperate position we are in – let alone care about it. If you take away people’s hope, why shouldn’t they just give up?

“I’m hoping the two men who local people elected to protect our interests [!] will start rattling some cages in Westminster. We will soon have a new Prime Minister and a fresh administration in Whitehall. I’m challenging our MPs to get Axminster on their radar and to secure some tangible recognition of our town’s fantastic record of self-help.

“Meanwhile, we also have a new administration running East Devon. I also challenge them to do their bit, as a matter of urgency, to help our fantastic town to thrive and prosper”.

Clinton Devon Estates and Newton Poppleford – a lesson from Budleigh Salterton

The people of Budleigh Salterton would advise the people of Newton Poppleford not to hold out much hope in acquiring a surgery or anything of benefit to the village. (see East Devon Watch 11 July) They have been down a very similar route with Clinton Devon Estates.

The failure of the BS Neighbourhood Plan to include all the hospital garden as open space, leaving only under a half leased to the new hospital hub left Clinton Devon Estates controlling the other half. A planning application was submitted for the construction of 2 open market dwellings and associated access in its plot. Like Newton Poppleford the estate lodged an appeal against the delay in making a decision by EDDC. However, the Inspector turned down this on appeal concluding that the benefit to the town of building two houses in the garden was outweighed by the negative effect upon the recreational space within this part of Budleigh Salterton.

“In the absence of evidence to indicate that the remaining garden would adequately meet the needs of visitors to the health and well-being hub, in relation to this main issue, the proposal would have a negative effect upon availability of recreational space within this part of Budleigh Salterton, contrary to LP Strategy 6. The proposal would not result in an enhancement of the retained garden and so would not comply with LP Policy RC1.”

So what did CDE do? Did this estate whose motto is

DOING TODAY WHAT IS RIGHT FOR TOMORROW

allow the continued access to this land which cottage hospital patients had enjoyed since 1887?

No, the estate chose to ignore the spirit of the Planning Inspectorate’s decision.

They erected a fence. I am sure many of Owl’s readers have seen the “abomination” (BS Journal Feb. 15 2018) and may have seen children confined to playing in just under a half of the garden.

So those patients living in Newton Poppleford and seeking to consult their GP will have to continue to travel to Ottery St Mary. (Remember that Newton Poppleford is within the Ottery St. Mary practise boundary, not the nearer Sidmouth!) If they rely on public transport there is no direct bus route, patients have to travel into Exeter and out again, a distance of around 23 miles with a round trip time of at least 2hrs 30 mins. (and don’t ask about the cost)!

“‘Vanity project’: debts pile up for English free schools scheme”

“Part of the government’s flagship free schools programme is facing mounting financial difficulties because of its unpopularity with parents and pupils, with schools forced to pay back millions of pounds to the Department for Education and cut staff after failing to attract and retain students.

University technical colleges (UTCs), a type of free school in England that was launched in 2010, ran up debts of £14m last year after many fell short of their forecasts for pupil numbers. Others had to borrow money from the DfE’s funding arm, throwing into question their long-term viability.

Research by the Price Bailey accountancy firm disclosed to the Guardian reveals that 31 out of 40 UTCs with published accounts owe money to the DfE’s education and skills funding agency (ESFA), including 25 schools owing a total of £8.6m after educating fewer pupils than they received funding for through their general annual grant. …

Price Bailey said it had analysed the accounts of 40 of the 50 UTCs operating last year and found that only nine were operating within their budgets, with 31 recording deficits and one or more outstanding debts to the DfE, including 10 owing nearly £4.7m in general loans to cover running costs and three with working capital loans adding up to nearly £1m.”

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2019/jul/13/vanity-project-debts-pile-up-for-english-free-schools-scheme?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

“Permission granted for ‘ridiculous’ flats smaller than TAXIS that ‘ignore basic needs’ “

“Developers planning on building two flats each smaller than a London taxi have been given permission by the local council.

The two ‘studio’ flats – one 90sq ft and the other 97sq ft – are planned for a disused building in Purley, south London, and were given the green light by Croydon council last year under permitted development rules.

Just two thirds of the size of most parking spaces, the cramped properties are part of plans for the building which also includes a 240sq ft two-bedroom ground floor apartment.

The building’s owner, Andrew Weinstein, has other plans for a 300sq ft three-bedroom space and a 280sq ft two-bedroom apartment on the first floor, but building work is yet to start.

Rules in London state studio flats must be at least 400sq ft, according to Mail Online.

The two flats have been described as the smallest allowed under the rules.

Julia Park, head of housing research for architects Levitt Bernstein, described the properties as “ridiculously small” with very little light.

Developers do not face the usual scrutiny under permitted development rights, with no size restrictions on flats and few ways of councils turning down applications, the Times reported.

Landlords have been accused of ‘disregarding basic human needs’ by ‘exploiting planning loopholes’.

It comes another scheme to convert a warehouse in Barnet, north London, into a 107-flat block with 56 not having an outwards facing window, sparked outrage with locals.

Complaints flooded in against the plans submitted by the Cowell Group, with locals saying the cramped spaces could lead to mental health problems for those living there.

The Barnet Society, made up of residents, said it was “a cynical exploitation of planning loopholes — compounded by disregard for basic human needs”.

The plans, by Adrian Levy and Nicholas Cowell and rival developer Dandi Living, show that even the apartments with an outwards-facing window only have one, with some sharing corridors with a row of offices.

Ali Reza Ravenshad from Dandi Living claimed his company was not going to build the tiny flats and was “playing the planning game”.

Mr Weinstein did not reply to requests for comment from the Times or MailOnline.

The Cowell Group and Dandi Living said they “take great pride in their track record for delivering high end, aesthetic and affordable housing”.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/permission-granted-ridiculous-flats-smaller-18195135

“An election could happen at any time – electoral law needs to be urgently updated”

Owl says: recalling the mess EDDC’s CEO made of past elections (where he “lost” 6,000 voters), and when he was later forced to explain himself (not all that well) to a parliamentary committee:

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2014/10/14/official-transcript-of-eddc-ceo-evidence-to-parliamentary-committee-on-voter-engagement/

this is LONG overdue!

“Last week, the House of Commons Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) committee published its response to the government’s Online Harms White Paper, where it called for urgent legislation to safeguard future elections. Echoing the ERS’s calls, the committee noted that ‘[w]ere an election or referendum to take place later this year, campaigns would be fought using electoral law that is wholly inadequate for the digital age.’

The government’s long-awaited white paper on online harms was published in April 2019 and offered a package of measures to tackle online harms (e.g. cyberbullying and disinformation) and to regulate internet companies who do not adequately protect their users. This would be achieved by establishing a new statutory duty of care towards users, which would make tech companies responsible for users’ safety online and tackle harm caused by content or activity on their services. Compliance with this duty would be overseen by a new independent regulator. Both the duty of care requirement and the establishment of a regulator were proposals included in the DCMS committee’s Final Report on Disinformation and ‘fake news’.

While it welcomed the (limited) measures proposed to tackle disinformation, in its response the DCMS committee said it was ‘disappointed’ with the ‘scant focus’ the white paper paid to the urgent changes that are needed around electoral interference and online political advertising.

In particular, the committee said that the measures included in the white paper to tackle digital campaigning were limited and did not address the committee’s recommendations on creating a category for digital spending on campaigns (currently parties and campaigners do not need to provide a breakdown of online spend) and a searchable public repository where information on political advertising material would be available.

The committee also lamented the fact that white paper did not acknowledge the risks of foreign investments in elections or the role and power of unpaid campaigns and Facebook groups in influencing elections and referendums. Regarding the first point, the committee will be taking further evidence this month on how anti-money laundering regulations may be adapted to digital campaigning, particularly given the use of online payment systems such as PayPal.

Despite the government’s commitment to extending imprints (disclosures stating who paid for and promoted campaign material) to online election material, the committee voiced concern about ‘how long it may take in practice for digital imprints to be enshrined in legislation’ given the government’s lack of urgency in addressing the committee’s other proposals.

The committee is therefore calling for ‘urgent legislation’ to be brought forward at once so as to bring electoral law in line with digital campaigning techniques, particularly with regards to digital imprints, and has asked the government to respond by 24 July with a commitment on this.

Most of the calls reiterated by the DCMS committee in their report on the online harms white paper have also been made by the ERS and our contributors in our report on online campaign regulation, Reining in the Political ‘Wild West’: Campaign Rules for the 21st Century, namely:

  • Extending the imprint requirement to online campaign materials and improving how campaigners report funding and spending.
  • Creating a single online database of political adverts, which would be publicly available and easily searchable.
  • Ensuring that those charged with enforcing the rules have sufficient enforcement powers and resources that act as a meaningful deterrent against wrongdoing.
  • Establishing a statutory code of practice for political parties and campaignersaround online campaigning and the use of personal data.
  • Comprehensively reviewing our electoral law, ensuring that it is updated and future-proofed for the digital age.

Protecting the integrity of our elections and referendums is vital to ensuring public confidence in our democratic processes, and we welcome the DCMS committee’s calls for updating our outdated campaign rules. We hope the government will tackle this unregulated online Wild West with the urgency it deserves.”

An election could happen at any time – electoral law needs to be urgently updated

Swire gets his hands in yet another iffy-sounding money-making business pie – this time in Malaysia

“Whilst Foreign Secretary the front runner in the present Conservative leadership race appeared mainly concerned with selling weapons on behalf of British business, barking at visiting Malaysian dignatories “Aren’t you interested in buying arms?” in lieu of a more conventional welcome. To which the answer has so far been a sensible no.

The question is how will trade and investment flow if Boris takes charge? Brexit to one side (having to an extent performed its purpose in making him leader) it seems likely that Johnson will soon respond to some of the financial interests which supported his rise. These include businessmen behind what is termed as the ‘Commonwealth Agenda’, keen to revive what they see as the UK’s special ties with countries such as Malaysia.

Barely known in the UK, but long since recognised as a key promoter of this agenda and also of former prime minister Najib Razak is Lord Jonathan Marland, who set up a two pound limited company called the Commonwealth Enterprise and Investment Council and appointed himself as Chairman after stepping down from a short stint as a working peer in the Department for Energy in 2014.

The Commonwealth Enterprise and Investment Council (CWEIC) has a ‘small secretariat’ at the Malborough House headquarters of the Commonwealth according to its website and Marland has hired the former Foreign Office minister Hugo Swire (from the Swire commercial family and previously in charge of Malaysian matters) to be his Deputy.

The focus of CWEIC is concentrated on channelling foreign money into the UK as per a new so-called ‘Commonwealth Partnership Programme’ signed last week with the well-known off-shore haven of Jersey purportedly designed to:

“.. unlock opportunities for Jersey to increase its visibility and access to key decision makers in priority Commonwealth markets through CWEIC’s extensive cross-border networks and in-country expertise.
Lord Marland said: “I am delighted the Government of Jersey is strengthening its partnership with CWEIC. Together we will continue to support the ambitions of the Government of Jersey to increase trade across the 53 members countries of the Commonwealth.”
Senator Gorst [of Jersey] said: “I hope … CWEIC’s support will maximise opportunities and encourage UK-based programmes or inward delegations to visit Jersey.”

As readers of Sarawak Report may be aware Lord Marland likewise claims he was the driving force behind the massive investment of Malaysian public money into London’s most costly ever development project at Battersea Power Station during his short term as a minister:

I think the only legacy [of his role] that… lasting legacy will forever exist would be Battersea Power Station which I was the minister responsible for getting that going… it is fascinating seeing the towers coming down and going back up again which I was utterly insistent upon and actually getting the Malaysians, they were brilliant, they are still. …

Q: What do you regard as your big achievement in office?
LM: .. I think opening trade relationships with some of the biggest countries in the world which had completely died. I mean, Malaysia for example, you know, the amount of Malaysia monies coming in… Getting those relationships going and then buying into British. [Lord Marland]

As testimony to his role Marland attended the earth-turning on the project in 2013 together with private developers SP Setia, former PM Najib Razak (Malaysian Government concerns Sime Derby and EPF already owned 60%), former PM David Cameron and the then London Mayor Boris Johnson.

Swiftly, the major shareholder of SP Setia, Liew Kee Sin, managed to sell out his stake in the company to the Minister of Finance (also Najib) controlled fund PNB the following year at what could only be described as a surprisingly advantageous price of RM3.95 for each of his 67 million shares, which was RM1.00 above the market rate.

Having cashed out so handsomely Liew was perhaps equally surprisingly permitted to remain as Chairman thanks to the acquiescence of the new publicly owned shareholders. Meanwhile he transferred most of the SP Setia staff to a new company under his control, namely the now burgeoning property development company Eco World, which soon got down to a number of rival developments next door to Battersea itself in London.”

http://www.sarawakreport.org/2019/07/will-britains-boris-boost-business-for-malaysia/

“Heatwaves test limits of nuclear power”

Not true, as the article implies, that because Hinkley C uses seawater, which is cooler, it is not at risk. There are many examples of coastal nuclear reactors having to close down because seawater has become too warm in heatwaves – including in places such as Finland, Sweden and Germany. Here’s the evidence:

https://www.npr.org/2018/07/27/632988813/hot-weather-spells-trouble-for-nuclear-power-plants?t=1562937536321

“Enthusiasts describe nuclear power as an essential tool to combat the climate emergency because, unlike renewables, it is a reliable source of base load power.

This is a spurious claim because power stations are uniquely vulnerable to global heating. They need large quantities of cooling water to function, however the increasing number of heatwaves are threatening this supply.

The French energy company EDF is curbing its output from four reactors in Bugey, on the Rhône River near the Swiss border, because the water is too warm and the flow is low.

Some reactors in the US are also frequently affected. This matters in both countries because the increasing use of air conditioning means electricity demand is high during summer heatwaves and intermittent nuclear power is not much help.

This does not affect nuclear power stations in the UK because they draw their water supplies from the sea, which stays relatively cool. However, it may affect plans to build small reactors on a lake in Trawsfynydd, Wales. And it may also reduce some of the UK’s power supplies during the summer.

As heatwaves intensify, the flow of electricity from French reactors through the growing number of cross-Channel interconnector cables cannot be relied on.”

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/jul/08/weatherwatch-heatwaves-nuclear-power?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

“Something fishy is going on with the Tory leadership race online”

“Two of the most prolific Twitter accounts supporting Boris Johnson have displayed bot-like behaviour, while three of Jeremy Hunt’s top followers have suspiciously high post rates.

The Institute for Strategic Dialogue (ISD), a London-based think tank researching political extremism, monitored the tweets mentioning either Jeremy Hunt’s or Boris Johnson’s handles, or their respective campaign hashtags, #HastobeHunt and #BackBoris, between May 24 and June 30.

The ISD researchers found that three of the top ten accounts engaging with Jeremy Hunt posted over 100 tweets a day, while another account in the top ten had been suspended as of June 30. The ISD sets the threshold for suspiciously high activity levels at more than 50 tweets a day.

Out of the top ten accounts mentioning Boris Johnson or his campaign, three produced over 100 tweets per day; two of those three accounts, the ISD says, presented “bot-like” behaviour and had already been spotted by the organisation when researching online “inorganic amplification” of UK political parties.

The majority of the tweets targeting Hunt do not seem to be directly connected with his leadership bid, but rather with his tenure as foreign secretary, mentioning topics such as war, human rights, and refugees rights. The suspended handle, @Kazem24529196, was the third most active Hunt-mentioning account and mostly tweeted about Iranian refugees’ resettlement in Turkey. Another account in Hunt’s top ten, @Ali85972170, has been suspended by the time of publication and seems to have mostly been tweeting about Sudan and other refugees issues.

Most of these issue-focused accounts were not hostile or aggressive towards Hunt himself. In contrast, the fifth most active account targeting Hunt, @EUVoteLeave23rd, has a decidedly anti-Hunt and pro-Johnson slant. It also appeared in Johnson’s top ten as the third most active account.

First created in 2016, @EUVoteLeave23rd pushes a pro-hard Brexit, pro-no deal agenda. It has over 35,000 followers, the identity of its owner is unknown, and its profile image features a Brexit Party rosette overlaid with a Back Boris tag.

According to the ISD, during the EU election campaign, @EUVoteLeave23rd was the most active account engaging with the Conservative Party; until recently, it was strongly opposed to the Conservatives, and to Theresa May’s leadership in particular. From late February to late June 2019, @EUVoteLeave23rd directly mentioned the outgoing prime minister in 10 per cent of its tweets.

The account styles itself as belonging to a former Conservative turned Brexit Party fan; now, it supports the Johnson campaign. According to the ISD, the account’s posts appeared times 1,309,493 between its creation on February 22, 2016 to June 27, 2019 – a figure that includes tweets, retweets, other accounts retweeting its posts, and deleted tweets. Although many of the account’s tweets appear to be original content, the volume and frequency of its posting, with an average of over 90 tweets a day, and a high number of retweets evince that at least some elements of automation might be at play.

Over the past few days, the account has been particularly active amplifying tweets that mention Boris Johnson’s account in a positive context, or feature the #BackBoris hashtag. Out of the last 3,200 tweets the account posted, over 500 contained Johnson’s handle and almost 1,000 contained the campaigning hashtag.

The account also mentioned Jeremy Hunt in 937 tweets, most of them rather scornful – one recurrent thread being that Hunt’s Brexit policy would be just a rehashed version of May’s. “It seems to pick up and retweet tweets that have either hashtags or flags in their handles,” says Chloe Colliver, head of the digital analysis unit at ISD.

“You could easily automate an account to pick up certain things and automatically retweet them if they had certain messaging. This looks like a managed account that is set up to pump out pro-Brexit accounts and messaging.”

Yin Yin Lu, a research affiliate at the Oxford Internet Institute, says that the account’s blend of human-generated content and aggressive retweeting caught her eye already back in 2016 during the EU referendum campaign. “It was quite interesting how it spits out original content at high volume, and the volume is so high that it has to be pre-programmed,” she says.

“From April to June 2016, it was very engaging, compared with the average sort of automated accounts or bot accounts,” Lu says. “On average, bot accounts had about 1.5 retweets, and non-bot accounts had 4.4 retweets. This account, even though it’s partially automated had an average retweet count of almost 11. It shows that the network it’s involved with is quite extensive – it’s got 36,000 followers.”

The ISD points out that, according to the Information Operations Archive, the account, had 172 interactions (mostly retweets) with accounts known to be associated with Iranian or Russian state-backed disinformation operations.

“This shows that even if these are not important accounts in themselves, they are useful as part of a wider strategy to polarise people online,” Colliver says. @EUVoteLeave23rd did not reply to a direct message asking for more information.

Another emphatically pro-Boris account, @WeBackBoris, was also flagged by the ISD for what looks like automated behaviour. The account was created in 2011, but only started operating on June 3, 2019 when it tweeted 245 times. Over the following month, the account posted almost 15,000 tweets and tens of thousands of retweets. It did not reply to a direct message asking for more information.

Twitter, in an emailed statement, said that “platform manipulation and spam are against the Twitter Rules and we take aggressive enforcement action when we identify violations of our policies.”

https://www.wired.co.uk/article/tory-leadership-race-twitter

“Audit review raises prospect of new transparency rules for s151s” [Finance Officers]

“A review of local government audit announced by the government this week will consider new measures to give the public better access to financial information produced by section 151 officers.

Local government secretary James Brokenshire this week revealed the review, which will report next Spring, will be headed up by former Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA) president Sir Tony Redmond.

Brokenshire told the House of Commons this week that the review will examine the purpose, scope and quality of statutory audits of councils in England and the supporting regulatory framework.

The review follows concerns about the quality of local authority audits following the abolition of the Audit Commission in 2014.

Speaking to CIPFA’s annual conference in Birmingham this week, Brokenshire said: “Concerns have been recently raised about audit quality and whether the audit framework is too fragmented.”

But he said that restoring confidence in the audit regime needs to be accompanied by improvements in the way financial information is presented by local authorities.

He said: “As a result, I have also asked Tony to include transparency of financial reporting within the scope of his review.

“To be absolutely clear, I am approaching this with an open mind but our aim must be to ensure that the financial reporting and audit framework helps members, section 151s and chief executives to make informed and responsible decisions about improvements and is more open and accountable to our citizens.” …”

Audit review raises prospect of new transparency rules for s151s

“If you want to build a better society you need to build better homes”

“In the end almost every important domestic issue comes back to housing.

If you want to know why the economy is skewed towards the rich, why social mobility has stalled, why opportunities are curtailed and why health inequalities persist it is impossible to discuss any of these themes without reference to housing.

Having a decent home to live in should be a basic right but there are more than one million people on the waiting list for social housing.

Rent takes up 40% of our income on average, the highest in Europe where the average is 28%.

This consumes money which could, for instance, be spent on purchasing better quality food.

It is no accident the poorest people have the poorest diets.

Those on low-income are more likely to live in low quality homes with short-term tenancies.

A survey in 2016 found 60% of Londoners who rent were living in homes with unacceptable conditions such as damp or vermin.

Lower income families tend to live in areas with higher levels of air pollution and fewer opportunities to play outside either because of a lack of green spaces or high traffic densities.

This in turn puts pressure on the NHS and affects school performance.

Studies have shown that people who live on streets with high levels of traffic are less likely to interact with their neighbours.

Short term tenancies mean families in rental accommodation end up moving more often, disrupting schooling and fracturing social networks.

If you live in an area without decent public transport and cannot afford a car your chances of finding work or studying are more limited which curtails social mobility.

It is hardly surprising that the lack of social housing has driven up rents in the private sector.

A study by Shelter this week says private renting is unaffordable for working families on low wages in two-thirds of the country.

Help to Buy, which has so far cost £12billion, had the perverse effect of stimulating demand while doing nothing to address supply.

Wealth is accumulated in the hands of property and land owners but our local tax system is based on outdated property values rather than wealth and therefore entrenches inequality.

There are few more crucial issues and few of such importance which have been neglected by successive governments.

We are our on 16th Housing Minister in 18 years.

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/you-want-build-better-society-17997349

Clinton Devon Estates refuses to meet Newton Poppleford parish council over planning application … rushes to appeal

Clinton Devon Estates … again … not doing its reputation any good.

“Clinton Devon Estates (CDE) says it was unable to find a tenant for the practice which was promised as part of a 40-home development at King Alfred Way. Instead it applied to build two further homes on the land.

On June 11 East Devon District Council (EDDC) deferred its decision for 90 days to allow time for talks between CDE and Newton Poppleford and Harpford Parish Council.

The parish has now shown an interest in renting the surgery and wants to enter into talks.

CDE has instead lodged an appeal against the delay in the decision.

The surgery was part of discussions when a 40-home development was granted permission. At the time district councillor Val Ranger said she felt 40 new homes, next to an area of outstanding natural beauty, was a high price to pay for a new surgery.

Coleridge Medical Centre was originally due to take over the new practice but withdrew its support after NHS funding fell through.

CDE has now refused to meet the parish council and said it was because of the delays already caused, current NHS aims to centralise services and the extra cost involved if the surgery is built after the bulk of the development is finished in 2020.

When asked if it would consider withdrawing its appeal, Clinton Devon Estates said in a statement: “A new GP surgery in Newton Poppleford is no longer viable without a commitment from the NHS to operate it. With the submission of an appeal, the opportunity for formal discussions between CDE and the parish council is now closed until a determination has been made by a planning inspector.”

The developer said Coleridge Medical Centre confirmed in June that its plans to consolidate services within a larger site rather than at branch sites was unchanged. It understood that their plans were to deliver services with the Beacon Surgery, Sidmouth.

When asked if it would be open to talks about the possibility of the parish council taking on the surgery, a Coleridge Medical Centre spokesman said: “We and Devon Clinical Commissioning Group are always open to discussions with our local partners.

“We will continue to provide the existing single-handed doctor service at Newton Poppleford for two mornings a week for the foreseeable future.

“We remain committed to securing high quality and accessible GP services for the people of Newton Poppleford and any proposals about how to best provide this in the long-term must take into account a number of factors including cost, workforce and sustainable modern ways of providing care.”

https://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/developer-refuses-talks-to-resolve-issues-over-new-gp-surgery-at-newton-poppleford-1-6154891