“The Times” hates potholes

Three different articles in the newspaper today:

“Thousands of roadworks a year will be shifted on to pavements under government plans to cut congestion and prevent roads from being plagued by potholes, The Times has learnt. …”

“Britain’s roads are worse than those in Chile, Cyprus and Oman despite motorists paying some of the highest taxes in the world. …”

“Potholes are being left untreated for up to a year as councils hide behind red tape to avoid dealing with them and save money. …”

Source: The Times (pay wall)

“Concerns raised over plan for Exmouth seafront temporary car park”

Owl says: This is what happens when you run a council as a business and not as a public service.

“East Devon District Council (EDDC) is seeking to create 13 spaces on land behind the rowing club, in Queen’s Drive.

The plot, owned by the authority, has previously been used by Exmouth RNLI for storage.

Tony Crowhurst, vice-chairman of Exmouth Rowing Club, has questioned the financial viability of the car park, adding: “There is a lot of work that needs to be done to create a safe car parking space which I don’t think they will recoup.

“The fact that they are going to be using the duck pond for events – we’re going to have a double whammy of people parking to use that area and those parking behind us.”

Mr Crowhurst also questioned the impact the plan will have on the club’s ability to transport their boats across the road to the beach.

He said: “We’re a local club and have got around 80-odd members. We do a lot of things in the community but this will make our ability to transport boats across the sea even harder.

“Already, people will park in front on the club and go dog walking for one or two hours and we can’t get our boats out.

“I would say at least once a week we’re in a situation where we have to ask people to move their cars from the front of our gates.”

An EDDC spokesman said it is aware of the rowing club’s concerns and believes they can be resolved.

Exmouth Town Council’s planning committee is set to discuss the application on Monday (April 30).

EDDC’s cabinet is due to decide whether or not the proposed facility should be included on the authority’s parking places order.

According to agenda papers for the meeting to be held on Wednesday, May 2, at Knowle, Sidmouth, officers are recommending that councillors approve this.

EDDC say they have sought cabinet approval prior to planning permission as they intend to have the car park operational by this summer.

A spokesman for EDDC said: “We are hoping to be able to offer the car park for public use this summer so we are running both of these processes in parallel to save time.”

EDDC planners will make the final decision on the application.”

http://www.exmouthjournal.co.uk/news/exmouth-rowming-club-objects-to-new-seafront-car-park-1-5491480

THIS is how you hold a CCG to account!

“The NHS will face calls from leading county councillors to publish a comprehensive plan for public consultation on its controversial proposals for a major shakeup of health services in Lincolnshire.

Concerns have been raised by the county council over the lack of progress on the Lincolnshire Sustainability and Transformation Plan since an initial draft was first published in December 2016.

At the time, the plans outlined a required £205 million investment to improve the facilities at Lincoln County Hospital, Boston Pilgrim Hospital and Grantham Hospital.

The proposals revealed that Grantham A&E could be downgraded to an urgent care centre and maternity services centralised to Lincoln.

Over 500 jobs are also set to be lost by 2021 under the plans.

Lincolnshire County Council unanimously voted against the STP at a Full Council meeting in December 2016, just over one week after the report was first leaked to the press.

County council leader Martin Hill wrote to NHS chiefs in March 2017 adding his criticisms, claiming that “making things better for most people, at the detriment of others, is not good enough”.

Since then, the county council said that there have been delays in publication of the STP plan, with further concerns raised about the lack of answers to the financial struggles of the NHS in Lincolnshire as well as fears about the changes themselves.

United Lincolnshire Hospitals NHS Trust, which covers the three main hospitals in the county, was put in special measures by the Care Quality Commission for performance failures and in financial special measures by NHS Improvement in 2017.

Even this month, ULHT has forecast an end of year deficit of £82.4 million, £5 million more than its deficit control target agreed with NHS Improvement.

In addition to asking the NHS to publish a plan for public consultation “without delay”, Lincolnshire County Council will also call for a review of governance arrangements for the STP to provide clarity over decision-making, accountability, democratic engagement and oversight of the process.

Glen Garrod, Executive Director of Adult Care and Community Wellbeing at Lincolnshire County Council, said in a report to councillors: “The county council has a long and successful track record of working with NHS partners in Lincolnshire. More recently and with the development of the STP programme the nature of the relationship has changed and, given the quality, performance and financial imperatives facing NHS services in Lincolnshire, more profiled.

“Disappointingly little progress has been made to address underlying budget deficits, performance continues to be poor at ULHT and successive inspections by the Care Quality Commission have reported on serious quality issues.

“This has been the picture for a number of years with little sign that ‘the tide has turned’ and these critical issues are getting better.

“Change is likely, indeed necessary and improvements critical if Lincolnshire residents are to receive NHS services that they deserve.”

In response, John Turner, Senior Responsible Officer for the Lincolnshire STP said that Lincolnshire County Council is a key partner for the NHS in the county but refused to be drawn on when it would publish its plans for public consultation.

He said: “We are fully committed to working together with Lincolnshire County Council in the best interests of patients and the people of Lincolnshire. The level of our integrated services between the NHS and Lincolnshire County Council already compares well nationally.

“There is much to be proud of in our local NHS, with our dedicated staff and partners working to provide the best care for our patients. At the same time, it is widely recognised that health and care services in Lincolnshire are very challenged – we struggle to provide consistent care and meet all quality standards, to recruit clinical staff in key areas, and we are currently overspending by £100 million a year.

“In recent months the STP has reported progress in areas such as mental health, GP services, integrated community services and operational efficiencies and improvements have been delivered for patients.

“In addition, the STP is also undertaking an acute services review which is examining what would be the future configuration of acute hospital services for the population of Lincolnshire.

“We look forward to discussing this openly across the county in due course.”

Councillors on the council’s Executive will consider the next steps to take at a meeting in Lincoln on Tuesday, May 1.”

https://lincolnshirereporter.co.uk/2018/04/nhs-under-fire-from-county-council-over-lack-of-progress-on-healthcare-shakeup/

Deliberate government policies … NOT unintended consequences

“… Either the home secretary ignored the inevitable cruelty in chasing her targets – or she was too dumb to ask. True, Border Force staff told me that Rudd had had the wool pulled over her eyes about its state of dereliction. When she first visited Heathrow, managers bussed in apprentice tax-collectors from Newcastle to staff the passport kiosks, with passengers held back in another hall so that she saw no queues.

… Breaking this government’s stone heart has proved impossible over the years. As £30bn and then another £12bn were gouged from the social security budget, the devastating effects on families, on disabled people, on children, had no impact. Instead the government heaped abuse on victims, as Iain Duncan Smith vowed to end the “something-for-nothing culture”. Never admitting most people on benefits are in work, he liked warning them: “This is not an easy life any more, chum. I think you’re a slacker.” He denied his strict targets for knocking people off benefits: but jobcentre staff showed me what were called ”spinning plates” monthly targets, with one telling me: “You park your conscience when you work here.” Staff missing their quota were disciplined. The easiest hits were people with learning disabilities or mental illness, and benefits were stopped for tiny infractions. Did anyone in government break their heart over diabetic ex-soldier David Clapson, who starved to death when his benefits were stopped?

George Osborne relentlessly sneered at households sleeping on with “closed blinds while honest citizens set off to work”. Now his Evening Standard begs for charity for London’s hungry children, impoverished by him: the Institute for Fiscal Studies warns that another 1.2 million children are falling into poverty.

It never broke their hearts to punish families with more than two children, or cut rent support, or evict anyone with a spare room, sending them sometimes hundreds of miles from schools, jobs, friends and family. It didn’t break their hearts to see more than 50,000 Motability cars taken from disabled households. Would it break their hearts to see people with children using food banks?

Tory MPs know all this. I have sat in their surgeries to see how they react to the stream of human suffering they are inflicting. They look sorrowful, and promise to write (useless) letters to ministers. They get pleas for help from people being evicted and frail old people neglected at home for lack of care. They see children’s centres closing, and the soaring numbers of children taken into care because no one caught family problems early. They hear from patients in pain or danger through operations postponed. Maybe they complain about 600,000 lost young people, hanging around neither in education nor employment, with youth services having been abolished.

A “hostile environment” is what the government has deliberately created. Calculated cruelty has been policy, not accident. Writing about all this state-inflicted suffering can feel like banging your head against a brick wall: Guardian readers know it already, while government ministers don’t give a damn. Is Amber Rudd’s “heartbreak” a moment of great collective epiphany? Will a frozen dam of tears suddenly be unleashed? Theresa May’s “burning social injustices” burn brighter than ever, with no sign yet of an outbreak of howling repentance along the government benches.”

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/26/amber-rudd-heartbroken-windrush

County council refuses to spend business profits on affordable housing

“Liberal Democrat councillors have criticised Surrey County Council for failing to spend profits from its £298m commercial property portfolio on council services.

In November, the council transferred £3.8m of rental income from the properties into its revolving infrastructure and investment fund.

However, Liberal Democrats complained that the original investment strategy, agreed by the council in July 2013, promised to use income to support the delivery of functions and services.

Cllr Hazel Watson, leader of the Liberal Democrats on Surrey County Council, said: “I am deeply concerned that none of the income derived from the county council’s extensive property investment portfolio so far has been used to support council services.

“This contradicts previous assurances from the Conservative administration that the purpose of their investment strategy was to support the county council’s budget.

“The county council is proposing millions of cuts to services this financial year and it is simply unacceptable for them to use precious resources to purchase more property, when that resource should be used instead to protect services for Surrey residents.”

Responding to the criticism, Tim Oliver, Surrey’s Conservative cabinet member for property and business services, said: “The investment portfolio created under the investment strategy consists of property investments which have been made by the council in order to deliver economic regeneration or to provide for long-term future service use, whilst delivering an investment return.

“These assets provide flexibility in the estate whilst producing a net revenue.”

He said that the total net income delivered to date by the strategy will be used to support spending on council services in the future and was expected to have reached £5.3m by March 2018.”

http://www.room151.co.uk/treasury/lib-dems-slam-use-of-property-profits-at-surrey-cc/

“Staircase tax” WILL apply to business rates despite government promise to drop it

Owl says: so nos small businesses will get their own version of the council house “bedtoom tax” …

“Housing minister Dominic Raab has confirmed a government u-turn on a budget promise to compensate councils for the new “staircase tax” resulting from a 2015 Supreme Court ruling on business rates.

In last year’s budget, chancellor Philip Hammond announced that businesses would be able to claim a rebate on bills based on the way they were calculated before the ruling – backdated to 2010.

However, speaking in the House of Commons this week, Raab said that the government no longer intended to honour this promise.

“I do not think it would be right to compensate local authorities for what would effectively be an inadvertent windfall resulting from a judicial determination,” said Raab. “From the point of view of government policy, that was not something we wanted to see, and we have moved as swiftly and reasonably as we can to correct this.”

The Supreme Court ruling reversed more than 50 years of practice that businesses operating in separate units, or rooms, accessed from a connecting staircase received a single rates bill.

Following the judgement, the Valuation Office Agency has changed its practice to issue separate bills for each floor — with businesses able to claim a rebate back to 2010.

This means that some rates payers previously eligible for small business rates relief have lost some, or all, of their relief.

In addition, rateable value per square metre is sometimes lower for large properties due to landlords offering discounts to fill space.

Raab said that only a small number of businesses — fewer than 1,000 — are affected adversely by the change.

Raab made his announcement on Monday, during a debate on the tax, held during the second reading of the Rating (Property in Common Occupation) and Council Tax (Empty Dwellings) Bill.

Also speaking in the debate, Clive Betts, chairman of the housing, communities and local government select committee, said: “We accept that the legislation takes the position back to what people thought it was before the court decision.

“In the meantime, however, we have had the court decision and local authorities will have done their estimates based on that decision, so the government are effectively changing local authorities’ financial positions from what they thought they would be a few months ago.”

Raab said that local authorities had been informed of the change of direction “as soon as was reasonably possible”.

In a briefing criticising the u-turn, the Local Government Association said: “It is disappointing that the government has reversed their autumn budget decision on the financial implications of this measure, and has indicated that no compensation will be payable to local government.

“We support the housing, communities and local government committee’s recommendation that the government needs to reassure councils that they are not going to be worse off financially because of this legislation, and that the government should bear the associated costs as a result of the reforms.”

http://www.room151.co.uk/funding/government-u-turns-on-staircase-tax/

Austerity cuts – what austerity cuts?

EDDC:

Headcount = 526 as at 1st April 2010
Headcount = 598.5 as at 31st March 2018

http://eastdevon.gov.uk/access-to-information/freedom-of-information/freedom-of-information-published-requests/

Doing more with less? Looks like doing less with more!

Asset-rich pensioners should fund NHS says its chief

“The head of the NHS has suggested that pensioners’ housing wealth should be used to fund social care as he warned that the equivalent of 36 hospitals were “out of action” because of bed blocking.

Simon Stevens, chief executive of NHS England, said that given pensioners’ “relatively advantaged position” in terms of housing wealth, it was difficult to argue that working-age adults should fund the estimated £1 billion extra per year needed by social care services in increased taxes.

He was appearing in front of an inquiry by several Commons committees on the long-term funding of adult social care. …”

Source: Times, pay wall

“Scrutiny in public sector ‘struggling’ “

“Public sector scrutiny “struggles to keep up” with the “increased complexity of modern government”, according to a think-tank.

The collapse of construction contractor Carillion showed the government’s failure to effectively evaluate the use of private providers in the public sector, the discussion paper released by the Institute for Government yesterday also said.

Five million public sector workers were responsible for delivering services, the IFG noted, but still “there are weaknesses in the UK’s system of accountability, which often struggles to keep up with the realities of modern government both nationally and locally”.

Because government has failed to keep pace with the “increased complexity of modern government”, it has not properly scrutinised public-private partnerships’ value for money, Accountability in modern government added.

The think-tank suggested often in government accountability is replaced by a “pervading culture of blame”.

This culture, the think-tank argued, has been evident in the roll out of Universal Credit – which combines six working-age benefits in one – and more recently in the Windrush immigration cases.

IfG said: “While accountability certainly involves apportioning blame when something goes wrong, it should also foster an environment that lead to improvement.

“This is what the public cares most about- preventing failures recurring, rather than simple retribution.”

Benoit Guerin, a senior researcher at the Institute for Government, said: “Accountability helps people know how the government is doing and where to go when things go wrong.

“A lack of accountability is worrying because it increases the risk of failure and decreases legitimacy of the state in the eyes of the public.”

He said the IFG hoped to start a debate on how accountability in the public sector could be strengthened with the aim of making recommendations for reform.”

https://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2018/04/scrutiny-public-sector-struggling

“Don’t save it for the duchess. All new mothers should be treated like royalty”

Very difficult to do that when local maternity units such as Honiton are closed so many routine births AND emergencies have to travel 20-30 miles plus to Exeter:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/apr/24/duchess-cambridge-new-mothers-royalty

“Why I started a petition against NHS privatisation”

by Jamie Snape:

Today in Westminster MPs will debate a petition calling on the government to stop the privatisation of NHS services. Now, if I’m entirely honest, the date of a petition debate isn’t something that would normally appear in my calendar, however this particular debate I’m responsible for myself.

Until starting this petition I’d never campaigned on behalf the NHS, nor had I any connection to the plethora of local or national NHS campaign groups. So what drove me to begin the petition in the first place?

Well, it was after I’d encountered for myself the already privatised NHS services in my local area. Following this I was left with a clear understanding of what it means in reality, when our healthcare is provided by a profit-orientated business rather than an organisation focused on patient outcome like the NHS, and indeed what it is we are losing by privatising it.

As a parent, seeing my young children’s well-being affected directly and indirectly by NHS privatisation on more than one occasion, it motivated me to a degree that I might not otherwise have been.

So I began reading more about NHS privatisation, and why people like the late Stephen Hawking were so concerned. I concluded I could perhaps make a little difference myself by using a petition as a vehicle to help voice the concerns that many people have and that I share about creeping NHS privatisation.

This belief panned out, indeed a single post I wrote on Facebook about the petition was shared over 73,000 times, meaning it was very likely to have been read by more than a million people.

There are over 6,500 petitions on the parliament website right now, and it’s fair to say the UK public are petitioned out. Despite that, not too far short of a quarter of a million people took the time to sign this petition, which ultimately resulted in the scheduling of today’s debate in parliament.

NHS privatisation can mean so many things as there are so many aspects to it, so in terms of the debate itself, my hope is simply that I will observe a well-informed one. I hope that all the MPs involved demonstrate a real knowledge of the issues relating to it, such as the scale of current NHS privatisation.

What simply must be covered are the concerns surrounding the introduction of Accountable Care Organisations later this year, and their potential for leaving a back door wide open for a massive new wave of NHS privatisation.

If the debate centres around the small part of NHS privatisation, where a few people get bumped up the waiting list by having a routine operation performed by a private company, then I will of course be disappointed.

The concept of the NHS is erroneously referenced by many now in historic terms, especially when they are arguing in favour of NHS privatisation.

Personally, I see the NHS as something very much of the future, indeed I’m entirely certain that in years to come, a nation will only be considered civilised if it provides comprehensive free healthcare to all of its citizens.”

Source: Times (pay wall)

“Number of zero hours contracts rises by 100,000 in 2017, says ONS”

“The number of zero hour contracts in the UK labour market rose by around 100,000 last year according to the Office for National Statistics.

The agency reported that in its latest survey of firms there were 1.8 million contracts that did not guarantee a minimum numbers of hours in the year to November 2017. The equivalent number in November 2016 was 1.7 million. …”

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/zero-hours-contracts-number-ons-gig-economy-latest-a8317646.html

“Councils sit on £375m earmarked for affordable housing”

“Local councils in England are sitting on hundreds of millions of pounds of money designated for affordable housing.

A total of £375m is available, £100m of which has not even been earmarked for a specific project. This is despite a survey last year for the Town and Country Planning Association showing that 98% of councils described their need for affordable homes as either “severe” or “moderate”.

The cash has been accumulated under so-called section 106 agreements by which builders and developers give a council a ringfenced amount of money instead of building affordable homes within a development themselves.

James Prestwich, the head of policy at the National Housing Federation, which represents housing associations, said it confirmed the federation’s view that section 106 was flawed. “Affordable housing should be delivered within new developments, rather than developers simply funding its delivery elsewhere,” he said. “This would guarantee that affordable housing will be built alongside other homes.”

Some of the worst offenders shown up by research carried out by the Huffington Post are in London and the south-east. The housing minister Dominic Raab’s own local council, Elmbridge in Surrey, has £8m waiting to be invested.

Raab was criticised this month after he blamed high levels of immigration for increasing house prices. A review by the statistics watchdog found that his department had used an outdated statistical method to calculate the causes of housing pressure and their relationship with house prices.

The London borough of Kensington and Chelsea, which has yet to find new homes for two-thirds of the Grenfell survivors and other families affected by the disaster, has £21m of dedicated reserves. It says £19m has been set aside for Grenfell families.

Two Labour-held councils also in London, Southwark and Camden, between them have more than £90m that could be spent on affordable homes. Altogether, just 14 councils account for two-thirds of the unspent cash.

Rough sleeping in London has risen by at least 18% over the past year; in England as a whole, it is up 15%. Although a shortage of affordable homes is only one of many causes that explains the continuous rise over the past seven years, its consequences have a series of knock-on effects.

A spokesman for Southwark said the money it had was already allocated and the projects for which it was intended would be completed within the next five years.

Camden has set up a new scheme for affordable home building, the community investment programme, which is intended to create 1,400 affordable homes over 15 years.

Tony Travers, a local government expert at the London School of Economics, said nearly a decade of cuts had left council capacity to manage big projects “hollowed out”.

“Average cuts of between 25% and 30% over eight years and the way they have protected children’s and adult social care services have led to bigger cuts in departments like housing and planning. There is no question that their capacity to handle major projects has been eroded.”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/apr/22/councils-sit-on-375m-earmarked-for-affordable-housing

“Elderly and disabled at risk in inadequate housing, human rights watchdog finds”

Owl says: Not to worry – those at the luxurious PegasusLife development at Knowle will be just fine!

“Britain’s planning rules are fueling a housing “crisis” for the elderly and disabled which is forcing the frail to live in dangerous conditions, a leaked report by the Equality and Human Rights Commission seen by the Telegraph has found.

The Commission’s report, due to be released next month, found a “severe shortage of accessible and adaptable housing” with only seven per cent of homes in England offering minimal accessibility features.

It warns that local councils are failing to build enough accessible homes to meet demand and were not taking action against developers who failed to comply with regulations.

The Commission, a human rights watchdog, said that at least ten per cent of all future housing should be built with a growing elderly and disabled population in mind and that local authorities must reduce the bureaucratic hurdles for adapting homes.

The report comes at a time of a growing social care crisis in Britain with many elderly and frail people stuck in hospitals, unable to be discharged due to inadequate housing.

At the same time, younger Britons are struggling to get on to the housing ladder with older people unable to downsize due to a lack of suitable properties.

Following an inquiry into the state of housing for disabled people in Britain, the Commission reported that the “acute housing crisis“ was leaving elderly and disabled people in unsafe homes and leading to accidents and hospital admissions.

The report’s executive summary, seen by the Telegraph, said that some people were forced into “eating, sleeping and bathing in one room” and to rely on family members to carry them between rooms and up stairs.

Local authorities told the Commission that developers are “reluctant to build accessible houses, as they see them as less profitable”, and often failed to comply with accessibility standards.

Disabled older people are being let down and this is a stark reminder that urgent action is needed, which is the least they deserve in a compassionate society.

Despite this, just three per cent of councils took enforcement action against developers who failed to meet these standards, the Commission found.

The report also said that people were forced to wait an average of 22 weeks between application and the installation of home adaptations necessary to live safely and independently, with some waiting for more than a year.

The Commission’s report said that better housing would help ease the health and social care crisis as it found that poor housing led to an “increased need for social care” and “avoidable hospital admissions”.

Responding to the report, charities warned that the lack of suitable housing was exacerbating the NHS crisis as elderly and disabled people were forced to stay in hospital for longer due to a lack of safe accommodation.

Caroline Abrahams, charity director at Age UK said: “Providing accessible homes must be seen as core to reducing pressure on social care and the NHS.

“If these recommendations are implemented they will help many more older and disabled people to receive care and support at home.”

She added: “It’s vital that we build safe, accessible, high quality homes that work for all generations and that don’t undermine our ability to stay independent as we get older.”

George McNamara, director of policy and public affairs at Independent Age, the older people’s charity, said: “These are some of the most vulnerable people but they’re forgotten when it comes to housing policy. They are being discriminated against by a system that doesn’t work for them.

“This issue is only going to become more important as our population ages and people have a greater need for specialist housing that addresses all their health and care needs.

“Disabled older people are being let down and this is a stark reminder that urgent action is needed, which is the least they deserve in a compassionate society.”

Rob Wilson, former Government minister for civil society, said: “This isn’t a new problem, but this is a timely report and reminder that disabled people face enormous challenges with getting appropriate housing.

“Almost every local authority area faces the same difficulty in getting enough wheelchair accessible houses built.

“The Government’s drive to increase house building is very welcome, but clearly there is much more to do for those with these special requirements.”

Cllr Izzi Seccombe, chairman of the Local Government Association’s Community Wellbeing Board, said councils needed “greater planning powers and resources to hold developers to account”.

“Housing is too often unavailable, unaffordable, and not appropriate for everyone that needs it. This includes the availability of homes suitable for older people and people in vulnerable circumstances,” she said.

A spokesman for the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government said: “Our new planning rules make clear that councils must take the needs of elderly and disabled people into account when planning new homes in their area.

“We’re also providing councils with almost £1 billion over the next two years to adapt properties for disabled and older people so they can live independently and safely.”

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/04/22/elderly-disabled-risk-inadequate-housing-human-rights-watchdog/

Potholes: a sign for the middle-classes that austerity is biting them too, and it hurts – literally!

Matthew Parris in today’s Times – it’s a sign of the times when a deep blue Tory says “enough is enough”! But it will NEVER be enough for your political masters , Matthew … as long as the people at the bottom of this stinking heap bear the brunt and you – and those high above you – live in your golden bubbles and prosper.

“I blame myself. My bicycle boy-racer days should have been over. I’d had two whiskies at the Duke of York, the night was dark, the lane was narrow and I knew well enough there were potholes. This one was a stonker. Crash, bang, wallop. Anyway I survived. I broke a few ribs but the crash helmet did its job, the ribs healed, the bruises faded and I live to tell the tale more than a year later.

I tell it now more as parable than anecdote. In a couple of weeks come important local government elections in many places. We don’t think enough about local government, whose job it was to mend that pothole.

But by starting with a me-and-my-pothole story I risk sounding like a parody of one of those ghastly charity appeals on the radio, showcasing the plight of some victim, typically a child. “So poor little Matthew fell off his bike. For just £5 your local council could fix that pothole. Please send your donation, however small, to HM Treasury, Great George Street . . .”

My story is trivial compared with cuts which for others may have meant the loss of social care in dementia, no Sure Start centre for a child, the closure of a small local hospital or the end of a vital local bus service. So is there a connection?

Yes. Throughout history rings the cry “It’s when it happens to you . . .”. Austerity often doesn’t “happen” to people like me (and many of you) as fast, as often or as painfully as it does to millions of others. But potholes we Times readers see. When in our own lives our nearside front tyre is shredded, the ruddy pothole represents a momentary twitching-back of one tiny corner of a great curtain, behind which lie, no, not potholes, but a million anxious human stories, caused in part by cuts in public spending.

And, no, I’m not going to decry cutting public spending. Much of it had to happen. But I’m making two points. First, the exercise cannot be without limit. Second, the time-lag between the cut and the pain can be so long that by the time you feel the pain the cut may have gone much deeper than you noticed. We need to wake up to that.

So back, without apology, to potholes. Thanks to another of these, a friend in Lincolnshire has just broken his neck, though not fatally, thank heaven. Potholes matter in themselves. But they are a parable for others that matter even more.

Over roughly the last decade (my figures don’t cover 2017) spending on roads by councils has fallen by about a fifth. Serious injuries to cyclists have trebled, while cyclists’ numbers have increased by a fraction of that. According to the RAC, the number of cars needing roadside assistance after hitting potholes has almost doubled since January.

According to the Asphalt Industry Alliance there are 24,000 miles of roads urgently awaiting repair in England and Wales. On present trends a road is resurfaced every 78 years and it would now take 14 years, and more than £9 billion, to return the network to a “steady state”. Our roads have been crumbling.

Roads spending has just started to rise, albeit gently. Late in the day, local and central government politicians have woken up to what’s happening.

The trouble is, it’s already happened. Voters in their millions, including Times readers in huge numbers, are telling them so. Just as my little argument with Mawstone Lane was a parable for a wider problem with potholes nationwide, so potholes nationwide are a parable for a problem far wider than that. We may be deceived by the fact that you can get away for years, but not for ever, with pushing a problem to one side.

All the pressures on those who run government, local and central, are to worry about the short-term. George Osborne had the aftermath of a world economic crash to get Britain through. Philip Hammond has Brexit. And when the Devil drives (as in politics he always does) and if you can block your ears to the caterwauling of those who always cry wolf anyway, it is usually possible to leave issues like road maintenance, decaying school buildings, rotting prisons, social care for the elderly, Britain’s military preparedness or a cash-strapped health service, to tread water for years or even decades. “They’ll get by,” say fiscal hawks, and in the short-term they’re often right.

Nobody’s likely to invade us; the NHS is used to squeezing slightly more out of not enough; cutting pre-school provision is hardly the Slaughter of the Innocents; the elderly won’t all get dementia at once; there’s little public sympathy for prisoners; teachers can place a bucket under the hole in the roof; and road users can dodge potholes.

In the case of local government Mr Osborne found you could slash, not snip. It has lost, unbelievably, almost 50 per cent of what it gets from the general taxpayer in less than a decade. But, hey, the rubbish is still collected.

All this has encouraged those, like me, of a Conservative disposition who see state wastefulness everywhere, to think that maybe you can just keep on cutting and never reach bone. For so it has often seemed, however urgent the shrieks of doom-mongers.

But beneath the surface problems build up. The old get older, and more numerous. Potholes start breaking cyclists’ necks. Care homes start going under. The Crown Prosecution Service begins to flounder. We run out of social housing. Prisoners riot. And is there really no link between things like pre-schooling, sports and leisure centres and local outreach work, and the discouragement of knife crime? It all takes time, though.

In that most unfashionable thing, public administration, the life cycle of a problem may be counted in decades, even generations. The cycle of an elected politician’s term is four or five years. Democratic politics and good public administration march to different drumbeats.

When New Labour was elected in 1997 we Tories groaned as it tipper-trucked money into the NHS, school building and other public services. But after 18 years of saying no, we had let an undersupply arise: of bricks, mortar, equipment, wages, staff and morale — invisible on any Treasury balance sheet. Thirteen years later when Labour left office the undersupply was monetary, the red ink all too visible.

Must we forever oscillate like this? Probably. Unless politics understands this paradox: the right time to fill a pothole is before it’s a pothole.”

Care at home? Not if there are no carers for the homes

Care for 13,000 Britons at risk as provider seeks rescue plan

“The care of more than 13,000 elderly and vulnerable Britons could be thrown into turmoil after one of the biggest providers of home care visits in the UK warned it would go bust unless creditors backed a rescue plan.

Allied Healthcare, which has contracts with 150 local authorities and also provides out-of-hours services for the NHS, is asking for breathing space on its finances after cashflow problems that have been triggered in part by an £11m bill for back pay owed to sleep-in care workers.

The loss-making company has 12,000 employees and cares for 13,500 people in their homes via a network of 83 branches around the country. According to the Allied website it is the country’s largest domiciliary care business, twice the size of its nearest competitor.

Its Primecare division provides primary and urgent healthcare services, including NHS 111 telephony services, GP-led medical centres and end-of-life care. It also provides healthcare services in a number of secure settings including prisons, immigration centres and secure training centres.

Allied was bought by the German private equity firm Aurelius in a £19m deal in December 2015 but it has struggled against a backdrop of local authority funding cuts.

In a letter to creditors seen by the Guardian, its chief executive, Luca Warnke, said it had “significant funding pressures on our customers that have impacted on their ability to deliver financially viable health and social care services”. It added that it had taken the decision to pursue a company voluntary arrangement (CVA), an insolvency procedure that will enable it to agree a payment plan with creditors that include landlords and members of its pension schemes. It expects to file for the procedure on Monday.

Warnke blamed rising agency labour costs for its woes, pointing to the shortage of doctors and nurses since the Brexit vote as well as a potential £11m bill for backdated “sleep in” payments depending on HMRC’s calculation of the pay period.

Last year the government changed its guidance on how sleep-in carers should be paid, advising that they were entitled to earn the national minimum wage for the entirety of the time they were present in a house rather than just a flat rate. At that time some charities warned it could cost the sector £400m and potentially bankrupt many social care charities and providers.

The company said in a statement: “As with many independent providers in the UK health and social care sector, Allied Healthcare has been operating in a highly challenging environment for a sustained period of time, which has placed pressure on the company.

“As a result of these challenges, Allied Healthcare has has taken the decision to pursue a company voluntary arrangement as part of a prospective business plan that will ensure safe continuity of care across our UK-wide operations, place the company on a sustainable long-term footing and maximise repayments to creditors.

“The proposed CVA will not impact on the safe continuity of care that Allied Healthcare provides across the UK,” it said. “Allied Healthcare will continue to trade safely and it remains business as usual for Allied Healthcare employees and customers.”

The company insisted there were currently no plans for redundancies or branch closures.

A spokesman for the Local Government Association (LGA), which represents local authorities, insisted that councils have “robust” contingency plans in place to manage the care of individuals if necessary if the company were to fail.

“The absolute priority for councils affected is to protect the vital care and support that older and disabled people rely on and ensure it is able to continue without interruption,” a spokesman said. “The LGA is working alongside the Care Quality Commission and the government to support Allied, where possible, as it plans to financially restructure the business and continue to provide high-quality home care.”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/apr/20/care-for-13000-britons-at-risk-as-provider-seeks-rescue-plan

“Poorest families ‘going without food or power’ “

Owl says: Are we back in the Middle Ages with rich feudal barons and poor serfs?

“Hundreds of thousands of the poorest families in Britain are going without basic necessities, according to two separate surveys.

Citizens Advice said as many as 140,000 households are going without power, as they cannot afford to top up their prepayment meters.

And the Living Wage Foundation – which campaigns for fair pay – said many of the poorest parents are skipping meals.

However the government said workers are now earning more, and paying less tax.

The survey conducted by Citizens Advice suggests that most households that cannot afford to put money in the meter contain either children or someone with a long-term health condition.

Some people are left in cold houses, or without hot water.

“It is unacceptable that so many vulnerable households are being left without heat and light,” said Gillian Guy, chief executive of Citizens Advice.

“For some people self-disconnection is easily managed, but for many others it is an extremely stressful experience that can have harmful physical and emotional effects.”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43827846

“Devon councillors allowances set to rise by an inflation-busting 15 per cent”

“An inflation-busting 15 per cent hike in allowances for Devon County councillors has been proposed.

The independent remuneration panel has recommended that a rise from the current figure of £10,970 to £12,607 to be implemented by the council. It comes as no rise in allowances for members have taken place in the last nine years.

… Devon County Council’s procedures committee on Wednesday morning voted to recommend to full council that the 15 per cent rise should be implemented, but councillors from all parties will be given a free vote when it goes before them. … “

[There then follows a long justification from a Tory councillor about why this is acceptable and a table of the new allowances]

https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/devon-councillors-allowances-set-rise-1473146

“Funding for poorest children used to plug school budgets, say teachers”

“Schools are cutting back on staff, IT, equipment and day trips while funding for the UK’s poorest children is being used to plug budgets, teachers have claimed.

More than a fifth of teachers and school leaders believe pupil premium cash – the money aimed at the most deprived youngsters – is instead being used to make ends meet, a poll by the National Foundation for Educational Research found.

Almost half told the study that academisation – removing schools from local authority control – had a negative impact on the classroom, or no no impact at all.

The findings come amid widespread concerns from teachers, unions and parents about a squeeze on school budgets in England, though ministers have insisted more money is going to schools.

The survey of 1,246 primary and secondary teachers and senior leaders, working in English state schools, found that 22% said money from the pupil premium – extra funding to support the most disadvantaged youngsters – is being used to plug gaps elsewhere in their school’s budget.

Just over a third (36%) said this was not happening and the rest did not know.

Among the senior leaders polled, 34% said pupil premium funding was being used elsewhere, with 57% saying no.

Those surveyed by the National Foundation for Educational Research (NFER) were asked whether their school was cutting back on certain areas for financial reasons.

Some 63% said their school was cutting back on teaching assistants, making it the most popular answer, with 50% saying there had been cuts to support staff, and 39% saying teaching staff.

In addition, 44% said trips and outings had been cut back and 41% said there had been cuts to IT equipment.

The survey was commissioned by the Sutton Trust ahead of its education summit in New York. …”

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/funding-for-poorest-children-used-to-plug-schools-budget-say-teachers_uk_5ad7c36be4b03c426dab01f8