The new council at EDDC – “Independent Group” stitches up Independent East Devon Alliance, opting for cosy relationship with old-style Tories!!!

No representation at all for East Devon Alliance members, except Val Ranger for symbolic appountment as Deputy Chairman. Lib Dems totally excluded too.

Stuart Hughes (Tory) voted in as new Chairman – unopposed and nominated by Independent Ben Ingham and seconded by Tory Phil Twiss!

Says it all really …

Vice-Chairman Val Ranger – EDA

New Leader – Ben Ingham – Independent Group, Exmouth

New deputy leader – Susie Bond – Independent Group, Feniton

Committee chairmen:

Overview – Nick Hookway – Independent Group, Exmouth
Scrutiny – Alan Dent – Tory, Budleigh
Housing Review Board – Tony McCollum – Independent Group, Honiton
Strategic Planning Committee – Susie Bond – Independent Group, Feniton
Development Management Committee – Mike Howe – Tory, Clyst Valley
Audit and Governance – Sam Hawkins, IndeGroyp, Cranbrook
Standards – Stuart Hughes – Tory, Sidmouth Sidford
Interviewing (chief officers) – Ben Ingham, Independent Group, Exmouth
Employment Appeals – Susie Bond – Independent Group, Feniton
Licensing and Enforcement – Paul Jarvis – Independent Group, Budleigh

So, first day – sold out.

Owl knew it had to keep an eye on this lot …

A bad, bad day for East Devon.

Surprise, surprise: the business people running Local Enterprise Partnerships are not attracting funding – from business people!

As Owl has been saying for YEARS – THESE EMPERORS HAVE NO CLOTHES!!!!! Neither do they have transparency or accountability.

It’s verging on the corrupt, definitely a conflict of interest and is certainly unethical – it means a very, very few business people, taking no risks for themselves or their businesses, divvying up OUR money for their own pet projects, with almost no oversight from the councils they have robbed of funds and no loss for them if projects fail or over-run in time or cost.

A national scandal.

“Private sector firms are not matching public sector funding for local regeneration, senior civil servants have admitted.

Two senior civil servants at the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government told MPs on Parliament’s Public Accounts Committee (PAC) that cash from the EU, public sector and higher education are still the main sources for funding regional development projects.

The department’s permanent secretary Melanie Dawes and director general Simon Ridley said match funding for the £9.1bn Local Growth Fund is largely dependent on match funding from councils and other public bodies.

Ridley also admitted there were still challenges over transparency and the boundaries of some Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs).

The LEPs were set up following the abolition of regional development agencies with the idea that they would be a partnership between business and local government – with an expectation that firms would help funding regional regeneration.

Ridley told the committee that the main private sector input into the LEPs is the time and expertise of board members who work for free.

Committee member Anne Marie Morris said: “Clearly, you are having the private sector involved, so how come you haven’t got a significant financial commitment from them?”

Ridley responded: “The capacity funding we give requires match from the LEP in different ways.

“A large number of business people on the boards do it without renumeration. A lot of the capacity support around the accountable body that the local authority provides is paid for by the LEP.

“Our core expectation was to set up partnerships between the private sector and local government to think about local area development.

“Some of those funding streams are matched by private sector funding schemes.”

Committee chair Meg Hillier asked if developers and construction firms were giving over and above Section 106 contributions to enable projects.

She said: “There is a danger that without having any skin in the game, businesses can walk away and local taxpayers end up picking up the bill.”

Ridley replied: “What the LEP is seeking to do is bring forward projects in the local area that wouldn’t otherwise be coming forward.

“They are often funded by more than one funding stream from the public sector.”

The committee also challenged the pair over a claim that LEPs tended to go to the top-five local employers and as a result, other firms were being left out of key decisions.

Oxford University has become a major decision-maker for its LEP, the committee heard.

Committee member Layla Moran asked: “How do we know that everyone who is a stakeholder in this money is actually involved in the decision?”

Hillier also questioned if the LEPs were accountable, citing Oxfordshire, where meetings were not being held in public.

Dawes said the use of scores in the LEPs annual performance review were conditional for funding being released and this had impacted on responses.

She said: “The real test is how it feels for local communities and I think that’s something that’s very difficult for us to judge in central government. We are on a bit of a journey here. It’s going to take a while.”

Ridley said local authorities had a crucial role in oversight, specifically through Section 151 officers who are ideally placed to deal with complaints.

He said: “All LEPs have got their complaints procedures. We have a clearer role realisation with the accountable body and the 151 officer, so they [the public] might write to them.

“The section 151 officer does have to get all the information that goes to the LEP board. I can’t personally here guarantee that absolutely all of that is in front of every scrutiny committee.”

Dawes confirmed the department has no metrics for assessing complaints being made about the LEPs.

MPs also raised concern about territorial battles between LEPs and combined authorities.

Decisions have still yet to be made about the boundaries in nine LEPs.

Dawes told the committee: “There are legitimate reasons why these geography questions are there. We are working actively with them.

“What ministers will have to work through is whether to impose a decision centrally.

“That would be a matter of last resort.”

Businesses failing on LEP match funding, MPs told

“UN report compares Tory welfare policies to creation of workhouses”

“A leading United Nations poverty expert has compared Conservative welfare policies to the creation of 19th-century workhouses and warned that unless austerity is ended, the UK’s poorest people face lives that are “solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short”.

In his final report on the impact of austerity on human rights in the UK, Philip Alston, the UN rapporteur on extreme poverty, accused ministers of being in a state of denial about the impact of policies, including the rollout of universal credit, since 2010. He accused them of the “systematic immiseration of a significant part of the British population” and warned that worse could be yet to come for the most vulnerable, who face “a major adverse impact” if Brexit proceeds. He said leaving the EU was “a tragic distraction from the social and economic policies shaping a Britain that it’s hard to believe any political parties really want”.

The New York-based lawyer’s findings, published on Wednesday, follows a two-week fact-finding mission in November after which he angered ministers by calling child poverty in Britain “not just a disgrace but a social calamity and an economic disaster”. Now he has accused them of refusing to debate the issues he raised and instead deploying “window dressing to minimise political fallout” by insisting the country is enjoying record lows in absolute poverty, children in workless households and low unemployment.

The “endlessly repeated” mantra about rising employment overlooks that “close to 40% of children are predicted to be living in poverty two years from now, 16% of people over 65 live in relative poverty and millions of those who are in work are dependent upon various forms of charity to cope”, he said. …

In his most barbed swipe at Rudd and her predecessors in charge of welfare, he said: “It might seem to some observers that the department of work and pensions has been tasked with designing a digital and sanitised version of the 19th-century workhouse, made infamous by Charles Dickens.”

He said he had met people who had sold sex for money and joined gangs to avoid destitution.

[Owl won’t bother wirh the Tory responses …. predictable … everyone happy … no problems … only we can …. the usual drivel …]

Alston will present his report to the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva next month and will argue that successive Conservative-led governments persisted with austerity and welfare cuts amid high levels of employment and a growing economy despite evidence that large-scale poverty was persisting. In doing so, “much of the glue that has held British society together since the second world war has been deliberately removed and replaced with a harsh and uncaring ethos … British compassion has been replaced by a punitive, mean-spirited and often callous approach apparently designed to impose a rigid order on the lives of those least capable of coping.”

The report slams the government’s austerity programme, with criticisms of “shocking” rises in the use of food banks and rough sleeping, falling life expectancy for some, the “decimation” of legal aid, the denial of benefits to the severely disabled, falling teachers’ salaries in real terms and the impoverishment of single mothers and people with mental illness.

Alston said austerity had “deliberately gutted” local authorities, shrinking library, youth, police and park services to the extent that it was not surprising there were “unheard-of levels of loneliness and isolation”.

There was some praise for ministers for increases in work allowances under the universal credit welfare system and supporting the national minimum wage, but Alston said these measures had had not stopped the “dramatic decline in the fortunes of the least well-off”.

He recommended ministers reverse local government funding cuts, scrap the benefits cap, eliminate the five-week delay in receiving initial universal credit benefits and rethink the privatisation of services including rural transport.

“Thomas Hobbes observed long ago, such an approach condemns the least well-off to lives that are ‘solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short’,” he said. “As the British social contract slowly evaporates, Hobbes’ prediction risks becoming the new reality.”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/may/22/un-report-compares-tory-welfare-reforms-to-creation-of-workhouses

“MPs call for national bus strategy and wider franchising powers”

Owl says: When will politicians discover common sense?

“Ministers must set out a national strategy for buses and extend franchising powers to all local authorities to halt an alarming decline in usage, MPs have said.

A lack of clear policy and a funding squeeze have contributed to the loss of thousands of local buses, worsening congestion, air quality and access to jobs, according to the transport select committee.

The committee has called on the government to draw up a long-term plan by the end of 2020 to support a sector that provides the majority of public transport. It said it should set out clear funding commitments and targets for a “modal shift” to bring car drivers and passengers back on to buses.

Public subsidy accounts for more than 40% of income for buses. Despite the scale of investment, the committee said a “fairer deal for the bus user” was needed that would demonstrate value for money for taxpayers and farepayers and reflect passengers’ needs.

More than 3,000 bus routes in England have been axed or reduced since 2010, according to the Campaign for Better Transport, while Department for Transport figures have shown a recent decline in passenger numbers after years of growth.

The committee chair, Lilian Greenwood, said the decline in services had “direct consequences”, affecting journeys to work, education and social events. “It narrows our transport options and pushes us towards less environmentally friendly choices. And yet our inquiry found no real evidence that the government was determined to take action to stop this.”

Passengers’ groups told the committee that simple, accurate information on ticketing and fares and service timings would increase take-up. The committee called for more concessionary fares to encourage younger people to use buses.

The report questioned why reforms that opened the way for some cities to control bus services had not been extended universally. London was exempt from deregulation of buses in the 1980s, and now metro mayors have been given powers to re-establish regulation. The report said the government should make all operating models, including franchising and the ability to create new municipal bus companies, available to every local authority.

Campaigners welcomed the report. Pascale Robinson, of Better Buses for Greater Manchester, said: “Everywhere should be able to have a franchised system. One place where the policy is in place to get a London-style bus network is in Greater Manchester, and we’re urging Andy Burnham to take up this opportunity now to get buses that work for our communities, not bus company shareholders.”

The Campaign to Protect Rural England said it strongly supported the committee’s call for a national bus strategy to help reduce carbon emissions and tackle rural isolation.

A DfT spokeswoman said the government recognised “the importance of the bus industry in connecting local communities, reducing congestion and improving air quality”. She said funding for councils had increased by £1bn and passengers would have better access to real-time information on fares, routes and services.

Labour said the Conservatives had neglected buses, damaging communities. The shadow transport secretary, Andy McDonald, said: “Labour would end austerity for bus services, delivering the funding to reverse over 3,000 route cuts and invest in new services … and give all local authorities the power to bring services under public control.”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/may/22/mps-call-for-national-bus-strategy-and-wider-franchising-powers

Tories for Trumpery? Drafting new law to protect MPs on party overspending

Tories draft law to protect MPs if parties overspend

Conservative ministers are drawing up a new law to protect MPs and party officials from prosecution if their national parties overspend during elections, leaked documents disclose.

It follows the conviction in January of Marion Little, a Tory party organiser from head office, and the acquittal of the MP Craig Mackinlay after they were accused of breaking electoral law as the party fought off a challenge from Nigel Farage in Thanet South. …

Transparency campaigners believe the government’s latest move is an attempt to avoid future prosecutions and would overturn a ruling by the supreme court.

Alexandra Runswick, the director of Unlock Democracy, said a “test of authorisation” would give candidates and party officials another level of defence from prosecution. “Such a move would not appear to be about reinforcing and strengthening electoral law. This would instead protect party candidates and open up the possibility of outspending rivals.”

Plans for a new law have emerged in correspondence seen by the Guardian and sent to cabinet ministers by Kevin Foster, the minister for the constitution.

“Legislation currently requires candidates to account for free or discounted goods or services that are made use of by or on behalf of the candidate. There have been calls to amend this legislation to include a test of authorisation by or on behalf of the candidate,” he wrote.

Foster told members of a cabinet subcommittee that the law on notional expenditure was tested in July when the supreme court ruled that the statutory requirement for an election candidate is to declare notional expenditure incurred on their behalf during a campaign. This might arise where a national party provided additional campaigning support in the constituency and was not limited to authorised campaigning.

Foster wrote: “There is a concern that candidates, their electoral agents and others acting on their behalf could be operating under legal risk. I am seeking the committee’s agreement to announce at an appropriate time that the government is exploring options to clarify the law on notional expenditure to alleviate the concerns highlighted. Any amendments in this area of law would require primary legislation,” he wrote.

Little, who had been employed by Tory campaign headquarters since 1974, was charged with three counts of encouraging or assisting an offence related to the filing of election expenses. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/may/21/tories-draft-law-protect-mps-party-overspend

Citizens Assembly to tackle climate crisis?

“Oxford City Council is to be the first UK local authority to establish a citizens assembly to help address the issue of climate change, and consider the measures that should be taken in Oxford.

The recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report warned that the current global target of 80% cut in carbon emissions by 2050 is not enough to avert catastrophic temperature change. It said it’s essential that global temperature change is limited to 1.5 degrees Celsius and that rapid, far-reaching and unprecedented changes in all aspects of society are required to ensure this.

Next week the UK’s independent Committee on Climate Change (CCC) will publish its advice to the UK Government on tightening Britain’s carbon reduction targets. This will lead to new minimum requirements for us all.

In January, Oxford City Council members unanimously declared a climate emergency and agreed to create a citizens assembly in Oxford to help consider new carbon targets and additional measures to reduce emissions.

The citizens assembly will involve a randomly-selected representative sample of Oxford residents and will meet in September. It will be the first citizens assembly in the UK created to consider climate change.

The City Council will be commissioning research to develop options and timescales for carbon reduction in areas such as housing and transport, which will be put to the citizens assembly. In addition, it will hear from a range of independent contributors. The citizens assembly’s recommendations will assist the City Council in its final decisions on adoption of carbon abatement measures and targets. …”

https://www.oxford.gov.uk/news/article/1064/oxford_city_council_to_establish_uk_s_first_citizens_assembly_to_address_climate_emergency

“Rewild a quarter of UK to fight climate crisis, campaigners urge”

Rewilding would (according to the Environment Secretary) focus on:

Native woodlands
Salt marshes
Peat bogs
Ponds and lakes
Meadows and grasslands

all of which we have in abundance in East Devon.

Perhaps it is now time to revive the idea of a Jurassic Coast National Park (West Dorset would be an already-enthusiastic partner) which was squashed by the previous council because they feared losing their cosy relationship with housing developers …

And, as part of our climate emergency, make rewilding an integral part of all future neighbourhood, district and Greater Exeter development plans.

Correction! WEDNESDAY crunch day for Indies at EDDC … and us

Elections for various posts will take place at the Annual Council meeting on WEDNESDAY (Blackdown House, Honiton, 6pm) where Leader, Chairman etc will be revealed.

Then the interesting bit.

How representative will the new cabinet be of different types of independents?

Jobs for the boys/girls or best man/woman for the job?

Will Greens or Lib Dems get a seat at the table?

Will it be loaded geographically to one side of East Devon or spread out equally?

Who will lead the influential Development Management Committee?

Who will represent EDDC at Greater Exeter Strategic Plan meetings?

Who will the MINORITY Conservative leader be?

Who will chair the Scrutiny Committee?

So many questions!

“UK’s ‘cruel and harmful policies’ lack regard for child hunger, says NGO”

“Human Rights Watch (HRW) has accused the UK government of breaching its international duty to keep people from hunger by pursuing “cruel and harmful polices” with no regard for the impact on children living in poverty.

Examining family poverty in Hull, Cambridgeshire and Oxford, it concluded that tens of thousands of families do not have enough to eat. And it revealed that schools in Oxford are the latest to have turned to food banks to feed their pupils.

In a damning 115-page report that echoes previous expert condemnation of the UK’s policies on food poverty, the NGO – better known for documenting abuses from Myanmar to Haiti – said that the government was breaching its obligations under human rights law to ensure people have enough food.

Volunteers and staff at schools in Oxford confirmed that they were now reliant on donations, saying that teachers were noticing pupils who were missing meals at home and needed to be fed.

HRW said that ministers had “largely ignored growing evidence of a stark deterioration in the standard of living for the country’s poorest residents, including skyrocketing food bank use, and multiple reports from school officials that many more children are arriving at school hungry and unable to concentrate”.

The report will provide further ammunition to those who say that the government is failing in its duty to the poorest. It comes before Wednesday’s release of the final report on the UK by Philip Alston, the United Nations rapporteur on extreme poverty, who has already highlighted the same issues in his interim findings, following a two-week tour of the UK last November.

The report, which will appear on the eve of the European parliamentary elections, is likely to echo Alston’s warning last month that the political preoccupation with Brexit meant that issues like poverty are being ignored in a way that will leave the country “severely diminished”. Alston said: “You are really screwing yourselves royally for the future by producing a substandard workforce and children that are malnourished.”

The government dismissed the findings, saying that it was misleading to present them as representative of the whole country, and said it is helping parents back into work to reduce poverty and is ending the benefit freeze next year. …

Kartik Raj, the author of the HRW report, said growing hunger was “a troubling development in the world’s fifth largest economy”. He said: “Standing aside and relying on charities to pick up the pieces of its cruel and harmful policies is unacceptable. The UK government needs to take urgent and concerted action to ensure that its poorest residents aren’t forced to go hungry.”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/may/19/uk-government-cruel-policies-child-hunger-breach-human-rights-says-ngo

“More than 2,500 post offices are set to close in one year unless ministers intervene”

“MORE THAN 2,500 post offices will be wiped out within a year unless ministers intervene, a trade body is warning.

Business Secretary Greg Clark was last night told communities across the UK face “catastrophe” without Government action.

In a blistering report, the National Federation of SubPostmasters (NFSP) warns that the Post Office network is “beyond tipping point” and urgent support is required to keep almost one in four branches going.

The Federation says a “digital” first approach by ministers means that revenue from providing Government services such as DVLA forms has collapsed from £576 million in 2005 to just £99 million in 2018.

And it says Royal Mail appears more interested in dealing directly with the public over the web than supporting the network.

Some 98 per cent of Post Offices are run by franchisees or ‘SubPostmasters’, with many vital for smaller towns or villages. There are 9,300 branches employing approximately 40,000 people.

‘BEYOND TIPPING POINT’

Calum Greenhow, NFSP chief said: “The viability of sub post offices and the morale of sub postmasters has been eroded to the extent that the network’s resilience is extremely limited.

“We believe a tipping point has been passed and the consequences of this are now being realised.”

He added: “SubPostmasters are resigning in high numbers because it is increasingly difficult to make a decent living.

“The closure of 2,500 post offices in a year would be a catastrophic loss to communities across the UK.”

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/9109911/post-offices-close-one-year-report-warns/

What’s the future for the Greater Exeter Strategic Plan? Highly debatable … unless …

Exeter – minor changes on 2 May (new Green Councillor, first Independendent councillor) but Labour still in control

Mid Devon – now no overall control (Lib Dems, Indies and Greens outnumber Tories)

Teignbridge – Lib Dems won control

East Devon – now no overall control (Indies, Lib Dems and Greens outnumber Tories)

Oh dear, looks like GESP may have to go back to the drawing board …

UNLESS the previous (unelected) councillors controlling it (Diviani for East Devon) and their bossy officers stitched it up before the falls from grace …

People sent to care homes more than 450 miles away from home

“One in five care home residents have been sent out of their local area, with some stranded more than 450 miles from families and friends, according to official data revealed under freedom of information (FOI) laws.

In the worst cases, frail or vulnerable people are being taken from five local authority areas in London and southern England to Glasgow and northeast Scotland, because beds are unavailable at home or cheaper elsewhere.

More than two thirds of the local authorities which responded to the FOI request said they had sent somebody at least 125 miles away.

Barbara Keeley, Labour’s shadow minister for social care, who found the information, said: “This makes a mockery of the government’s claim that they want people to receive care at home.”

The human cost of the policy was described as “heartbreaking” by Judy Downey, chief executive of the charity Relatives and Residents Association. On average, one in 10 care home residents never receive any visitors.

“If [friends and family] can’t get there, frankly it doesn’t matter if it is five miles away or 500,” she said. “Often people have more information about their weekend break in Paris than they are ever going to get on what goes on in a care home.”

Martin Green, chief executive of Care England, which represents independent social care services, said: “Local authorities just look for where they can find a bed . . . It’s a really huge issue because people should not be removed from their communities or their families.”

Source: Sunday Times (pay wall)

Mental health care: shocking system laid bare

Owl says: how much more has been swept under the austerity carpet?

“In the aftermath of the Winterbourne View care home scandal Jeremy Hunt pledged to make improving the care of vulnerable patients a central mission of his time as health secretary.

But despite speeches, policy documents, steering groups and delivery groups two reports next week will lay bare the continued failure of the system to protect those least able to help themselves. One of those reports was commissioned by Mr Hunt’s successor and Tory leadership rival, Matt Hancock. He won’t be thanking him for it.

Part of the problem is political. For example, despite introducing minimum standards for how adults on mental health wards should be treated in 2014, no such standards exist for children. For that, responsibility rests with ministers.

They are also responsible for a system that provides no incentives to minimise the use of expensive in-patient mental health beds. Those beds are paid for by the NHS whereas community care is paid for by stretched local authorities.

The NHS itself should not be absolved of blame. One former Conservative health minister said they had been shocked by just how unresponsive NHS leaders were to reform. It is certainly true that the NHS has jealously guarded its freedom to set spending priorities.

Finally, despite being the authors of one of the reports the Care Quality Commission, which inspects mental health units, bears some responsibility. That it took a minister, under pressure from the media, to uncover the continued failure of these units is shocking.”

Source: Times (pay wall)

Torbay independents and Lib Dems join forces …

Owl still a bit mystified why East Devon Lib Dems want to go it alone … they would surely be a force for good countering the effect of pseudo-independents…

The Liberal Democrats and Independents have joined forces to take control of Torbay Council.

It follows the elections two weeks ago where no party won enough seats for outright control.

The Conservatives are the largest party, but now the Lib Dems with 13 seats and Independents with eight are linking up.

They say they have shared values and will work together on their priorities of housing, helping deprived areas and regeneration.”

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-england-devon-48185493

Secretive group which wants to privatise NHS is funding Conservative Party (and Swire’s choice for PM)

Swire is a lead supporter for Dominic Raab – named below

“A secretive think tank which called for the NHS to be scrapped while its heads pour millions into the Conservative Party – and its MPs’ – coffers is being funded by big tobacco, an investigation has found.

British American Tobacco is one of the groups funding the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA), a free market think tank which is notoriously close-lipped about its donors.

The IEA has been an outspoken critic of public health measures for tackling smoking, obesity and harmful drinking, and past funders include organisations affiliated with gambling, alcohol, sugar and soft drinks industries. …

It has close links to the Conservative Party and the chair of its board of trustees, Neil Record, donated £32,000 to health secretary Matt Hancock between 2010 and 2018.

Dominic Raab – who, alongside Mr Hancock, is aiming to succeed Theresa May as Conservative leader – also has close links with the IEA, speaking at its 60th anniversary event, and promoting an annual essay competition as recently as last month.

When asked about these links by the BMJ, a spokesperson said Mr Raab has “always been a strong supporter of public health initiatives to make the UK healthier and reduce pressures on the NHS”.

While Mr Hancock is among the biggest beneficiaries, 30 Tory MPs including David Davis, Liam Fox and David Willets have received cash or hospitality from Mr Record or fellow trustee Sir Michael Hintze.

In total MPs have declared funding to the value of £166,000 from the pair since 2005, and they have donated £4.3m to the Conservative Party.

The BMJ investigation identified a 1999 document listing UK supporters of the IEA, including British American Tobacco, Rothmans UK Holdings, Tate and Lyle, Whitbread, and Coca-Cola Great Britain and Ireland.

When the authors followed up with key organisations to see which were still actively funding the IEA, British American Tobacco confirmed it was still donating. …”

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/health/big-tobacco-funding-conservatives-nhs-hancock-raab-davis-a8916561.html

Leasehold houses: promise of fix … one day, maybe

“Housebuilders are to be investigated over the mis-selling of thousands of leasehold properties after a U-turn by the competition watchdog amid pressure from ministers.

The Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) said it would examine the scandal surrounding new-build homes sold on leases that were subject to substantial increases in ground rents and the charging of “permission fees” for home improvements. Developers and freeholders could face legal action if the watchdog finds evidence of leasehold mis-selling. The watchdog said it would decide whether the practices constituted “unfair terms”, a breach of consumer contract law.

James Brokenshire, the housing minister, has previously called on the CMA to use its influence to tackle the “culture of consumer exploitation rife in the housing industry” with an inquiry into the estimated 100,000 homes sold with “extortionate” leases.

However, in November, the CMA told the minister it would not investigate the issue, citing the legal complexities surrounding historic cases of mis-selling. In a letter seen by The Times, the watchdog also noted it does not have the power to fine companies using its consumer powers and blamed Brexit preparations for it not being able to prioritise problems in the housing industry.

The U-turn comes after the Commons housing committee published a damning report on the scandal in March, calling for the law to be changed to help people stuck in leasehold properties with crippling fees that they are unable to sell on. It also criticised solicitors for failing to warn clients about the unfair deals, accusing some of being too close to developers.

The leasehold scandal emerged as developers began to sell houses on leasehold rather than freehold, often without the buyer fully understanding the contracts. In many cases the freeholds were bought by offshore investors who demand large sums from homeowners to buy out the contracts.

Taylor Wimpey, one of Britain’s biggest housebuilders, has set aside £130 million to help its customers escape unfair leases it sold. More than 40 property developers and freeholders this year signed a government-backed pledge to help homeowners affected by the scandal by changing the terms of leases for those with onerous clauses.

Sebastian O’Kelly, of the Leasehold Knowledge Partnership, said: “We welcome the CMA looking into this. It’s long overdue and will be welcomed by the 12,000 owners of new leases with doubling ground rents, and 88,000 where the ground rent is above 0.1 per cent of the sale price and whose properties are unsellable.”

The investigation comes as the industry attempts to improve its public image after criticisms of build quality as well as punitive hidden charges.

Countryside Properties this week became embroiled in a row with Joe Anderson, the mayor of Liverpool, who reportedly told residents he would ban the housebuilder from building in the city due to historic cases of selling leasehold homes with “doubling clauses” for ground rents.

Countryside said it no longer sold leasehold homes, had signed up to the leasehold pledge and took action to fix the doubling of ground rent leases that were in place two years ago. A spokesman for the Home Builders Federation said: “The industry has made huge progress to identify and address the issues raised on particular aspects of leasehold sales.”

Source: Times (pay wall)

Devon Lib Dems – what do they want?

What do Lib Dems want in Devon?

They don’t seem to know!

Independents and Lib Dems are working together in North Devon:
https://www.northdevongazette.co.uk/news/north-devon-council-annual-meeting-2019-1-6055299

They are considering it in Torbay:
https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/independents-consider-alliance-liberal-democrats-2865164

In East Devon Lib Dems say no:
https://www.exmouthjournal.co.uk/news/east-devon-liberal-democrats-coalition-decision-1-6046826

Swire, his other jobs, the controversial Lord and the Russian oligarch

Our current MP has fingers in many pies, here is a closer look at just one of those pies.

As Owl has previously reported:

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2019/03/17/swire-has-another-new-job-paying-at-least-312-50-per-hour-for-8-hours-a-month-with-an-irish-connection/

Swire has added this lucrative job to his Register of Interests:

“From 1 February 2019 until further notice, non-executive chairman of the Enbarr Fund, an early stage venture capital fund with universities in Ireland. Remuneration from Imprimatur Capital, Fifth Floor, 1 Tudor Street, London EC4Y 0AH. I received £15,000 on 6 February 2019 and until further notice I will receive £2,500 a month in return for a monthly commitment equivalent to 8 hrs. (Registered 22 February 2019).”

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmregmem/190507/swire_hugo.htm

Further investigation of Imprimatur Capital reveals that one of the company’s very recent former directors is Swire’s old pal – controversial Lord Greg Barker – with whom he shares another directorship in a (currently dormant) company – Eaglesham Investments, about which Owl has written extensively.

Barker has taken temporary leave of absence from the House of Lords so that his work for Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska does not have to come under scrutiny or a conflict of interest spotlight. He resigned from Imprimatur Capital only on 5 April 2019.

Barker is said to have received a $4 million bonus for work he did in the USA to get sanctions on his boss lifted:

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2019-05-01/en-chair-barker-said-to-get-4-million-bonus-on-sanctions-deal

Imprimatur appears to have a Latvian connection:
http://www.clusterpark.com/company.html

and the European Investment Fund says this about the company:

“About Imprimatur Capital

Imprimatur Capital is an international seed investor in high-growth technology businesses with global market potential. To date Imprimatur Capital has invested in 23 companies in Europe, Russia and the Asia Pacific region, in sectors including enterprise software, electronics, medical technology, homeland security and wireless/mobile. Imprimatur Capital is an active shareholder and helps its portfolio companies to grow and develop, expand into new markets, and increase in value.

https://www.eif.org/what_we_do/resources/jeremie/news/2010_news/2010_Imprimatur_Capital_Latvia.htm

Boy, Owl bets that Barker and Swire have some interesting conversations about their overlapping jobs!

Is nationalisation now a Conservative Party policy?

Perhaps THIS is why EDDC ex-Tory Leader Ian Thomas left the party (though Owl is STILL waiting to hear his explanation).

Imagine the debates at EDDC as Twiss and Skinner have to argue for it!

“The British government will renationalise the management of probation services in England and Wales five years after a heavily criticised programme of privatisation was deemed to have put members of the public at risk.

The supervision of about 200,000 low and medium-risk offenders will be removed from part-private companies and taken over by the government when the current contracts end in December 2020, said Justice Minister David Gauke.The existing model was intended to drive down re-offending levels when it was introduced but the chief inspector of probation, described the system last month as being “irredeemably flawed”.

The probation watchdog had previously found thousands of offenders were being managed by a brief phone call once every six weeks. Some prisoners were being given tents on their release from jails, an inquiry into homelessness published in March found.

“Delivering a stronger probation system, which commands the confidence of the courts and better protects the public, is a pillar of our reforms to focus on rehabilitation and cut reoffending,” Gauke said.

The U-turn marks a fresh embarrassment for Transport Minister Chris Grayling, who introduced the shake-up when he was justice secretary and has been dubbed “Failing Grayling” by the British press.

In his current job, Grayling awarded a 14 million pound contract for companies to ferry in essential supplies to Britain in the event of a no-deal Brexit to a company that owned no boats.

The decision to partially privatise the probation service was heavily criticised at the time.

Companies including France’s Sodexo, the United States’ MTCnovo and British firms Working Links and Interserve have been given contracts to oversee probation services.

The government has already announced it would abolish the use of handing out of new contracts to private companies to run government projects after reviews revealed little evidence of financial benefits.

It has also moved to strip some companies of their contracts because of poor performance or due to financial trouble.

Last month, the government announced it was taking over the running of a Birmingham prison from private operator after inmate violence made it unmanageable.

Last year the collapse of Carillion, one of the biggest beneficiaries of such privatisation contracts, forced the government to step in to guarantee services ranging from school meals to roadworks that the company had previously provided.

A few months later, it renationalised the rail route between London and Edinburgh, taking back the line from a private company after it over-estimated profits.”

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-britain-justice/britain-to-renationalise-probation-services-after-failed-privatisation-idUKKCN1SM0KC?

Small businesses accuse government of failing them

“Theresa May’s Government today stands accused of failing to back small businesses, in a report due to be launched by Home Secretary Sajid Javid.

A damning poll reveals three in five people think the Tories are letting down the army of small firms which are vital to the economy and town centres.

The findings come from a YouGov survey of 1,644 adults for the Centre for Policy Studies think tank, which was founded by Margaret Thatcher.

It revealed 60% of people believed the Government “is not on the side of small business”, with just 14% disagreeing. …

This report shows how bureaucracy and paperwork are stifling the growth of our small businesses and offers a series of compelling ideas for how Government can roll back the tide and show that the Conservatives are backing entrepreneurs.”

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/small-businesses-damning-verdict-nine-16052199