Category Archives: Austerity cuts

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

23 Nov 2017

Posted under

Affordable and Social Housing, Austerity cuts, Developers/ Development, Economy

“Budget 2017: Hammond’s Stamp Duty Cut Backfires As Watchdog Warns It Will Push Up House Prices”

“No new homes guaranteed either despite £44bn claim.

Philip Hammond’s Budget bid to woo younger voters with stamp duty cuts unravelled within minutes after the UK’s economic watchdog warned the move would push up house prices.

The Chancellor was cheered by Tory MPs as he unveiled a surprise move to scrap stamp duty for first time buyers of homes worth less than £300,000 and Treasury officials claimed it would save a million people an average of £1,600.

But the independent Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) demolished the policy, declaring it would lead to a spike in house prices – and may only result in just 3,500 more people buying a home than otherwise.

Hammond’s wider claim to be spending £44bn on housing also came under fire as it emerged the actual new money was £15bn and not a single new home would be built as a direct result of the measures unveiled on Wednesday.

After the summer’s snap election disaster and weeks of Cabinet resignations and Brexit rows, Hammond tried to reconnect with voters with a £25bn spending package aimed at the cost of living, NHS underfunding and the housing crisis.

But his hopes of a political recovery were knocked back as:

* A new pledge of £3.7bn for Brexit preparations outstripped the £2.8bn promised in day-to-day spending for the NHS

* Growth forecasts were slashed, with claims that weaker pay will lower household income by £540 by 2023 and the national minimum wage going up slower than planned

* A promised pay rise for nurses was unspecific and delayed, with no other public sector workers given an penny extra

* Universal Credit wait times were cut by a week but not down to the month demanded by critics, with no halt in its roll-out nationwide

* Fast-tracked plans to sell off state shares in RBS bank to raise £15bn were described as “desperate”

Jeremy Corbyn attacked the Budget’s failure to provide the radical policies Britain needs and seized on the housing measures as more spin than substance.

“The government promised 200,000 starter homes three years ago and not a single one has been built. We need a large-scale public housebuilding programme, not this government’s accounting tricks and empty promises.”

The stamp duty change – which kicks in from midnight on Tuesday – won cheers from Tory MPs as it was the “rabbit in the hat” plucked out by Hammond to end his Budget speech with a final flourish.

Yet the OBR was swift with a savage take-down of the plan and the Resolution Foundation claimed that “it would be literally cheaper” to buy the tiny number of winners a house each.

In a withering verdict, the OBR said: “The main gainers from the policy are people who already own property, not the first time buyers themselves… It is also possible that non-first time buyers will abuse the relief.”

The stamp duty cut only applies to house sales over £120,000 and as a result won’t help many people outside the south east and in poorer parts of the country.

A Treasury spokesman insisted the stamp duty cut would make a difference to many. “We don’t think that £1,600 on average for a million people over the next five years is a small move at all,” he said.

The Treasury repeatedly refused to say if a single new home would be guaranteed as a result of the wider housing package, which includes loans and funds and incentives for developers rather than concrete spending for things like council homes.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/hammond-stamp-duty-cut-savaged-by-obr-watchdog-no-new-homes-either_uk_5a15b44ce4b025f8e933247c

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

23 Nov 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Health and Social Care (local), NHS (local)

Comments

1 Comment

Austerity to continue unabated for NHS and social care

Lord Porter, Chairman, Local Government Association:

“… It is hugely disappointing that the Budget offered nothing to ease the financial crisis facing local services. Funding gaps and rising demand for our adult social care and children’s services are threatening the vital services which care for our elderly and disabled, protect children and support families. This is also having a huge knock-on effect on other services our communities rely on. Almost 60p in every £1 that people pay in council tax could have to be spent caring for children and adults by 2020, leaving increasingly less to fund other services, like fixing potholes, cleaning streets and running leisure centres and libraries.

“Adult social care services are essential to keeping people out of hospital and living independent, dignified lives at home and in the community and alleviating the pressure on the NHS. Simply investing more money into the NHS while not addressing the funding crisis in adult social care is not going to help our joint efforts to prevent people having to go into hospital in the first place.

“The money local government has to run services is running out fast and councils face an overall £5.8 billion funding gap in just two years. The Government needs to use the upcoming Local Government Finance Settlement to set out its plan for how it will fund local services both now and in the future. We remain clear that local government as a whole must be able to keep every penny of business rates collected to plug funding gaps while a fairer system of distributing funding between councils is needed.

“Only with fairer funding and greater freedom from central government to take decisions over vital services in their area can local government generate economic growth, build homes, strengthen communities, and protect vulnerable people in all parts of the country. … ”

Cllr Izzi Seccombe, Chairman of the Local Government Association’s Community Wellbeing Board:

“It is a completely false economy to put money into the NHS while not addressing the funding crisis in adult social care. This sends a message that if you need social care, you should go to hospital.

“If government wants to reduce the pressures on the health service and keep people out of hospital in the first place, then it needs to tackle the chronic underfunding of care and support services in the community, which are at a tipping point.

“In addition, central government’s cuts to councils’ public health budgets, which fund vital prevention work that improves the health of children, young people and adults, reducing the need for treatment later down the line and also easing the pressure on the NHS, need to be reversed.

“Adult social care needs to be placed on an equal footing to the NHS. It is clear that the public understands this, as adult social care was a central talking point in the recent general election. It is therefore deeply disappointing that government has today chosen not to capitalise on this momentum.

“While the announcement of a green paper next summer shows government recognises the need for long-term reform, this does nothing to address the immediate pressures older and disabled people are facing. Those who desperately rely on care and support on a daily basis cannot be left to make do while waiting for yet another review. They want action now.

“The £2 billion over three years announced in the Spring Budget was a step in the right direction, and councils have been effectively using this money, for example to reduce delayed transfers of care. However this was one-off funding and is not a long-term solution.

“Adult social care still faces an annual funding gap of £2.3 billion by the end of the decade. As a minimum government needs to plug this gap urgently to ensure services can keep on running and stop providers going bust, while we have the bigger conversation around how we secure a long-term sustainable future for social care.”

Grant Thornton (auditors)

““Continued investment into the NHS is necessary but the announcement today didn’t even cover the current deficit forecast until 2020.

Social care continues to be the main driver on demand in council spending and yet received no mention; a very obvious omission.

In 2011/12, social care accounted for around 28.9% of total service expenditure and rose to 30.16% in 2015/16, indicative of the growing demand that is not being met.

In particular, children’s services have faced challenging savings targets and very difficult decisions over a number of years and in 2015/16 73% of all councils overspent against their children’s social care services budget as they struggled to produce more with less.

By avoiding addressing this issue directly and continuing to invest elsewhere in the health and social care system the Chancellor is missing a valuable opportunity by choosing to invest in only the roof while the house around it is crumbling. …”

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

23 Nov 2017

Posted under

Austerity cuts, Health and Social Care (local), NHS (local)

Comments

1 Comment

The Budget – no lifeline for NHS

“ … Chris Hopson, chief executive of NHS Providers, said: “It is disappointing that the government has not been able to give the NHS all that it needed to deal with rising demand.”

He said the NHS was “trying to live hand to mouth” and Hammond had directed extra revenue to acute hospital performance when “the pressures across the rest of the health service – community, mental health and ambulance services – are just as great”.

The funding in the Budget was “less than the NHS needed” but Hopson conceded was “more than was expected.” The Office of Budget Responsibility had warned the NHS faced a £20bn funding gap by the end of this parliament and a recent joint-report from the Kind’s Fund, Nuffield Trust and Health Foundation said the health service needed at least £4bn over the next year.

Niall Dickson, chief executive of the NHS Confederation, also said: “This is another missed opportunity and falls well short of what is needed to relieve the massive pressures facing the NHS today”.

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, in his response to the Budget statement, said that the chancellor’s commitments did not do enough for “under-paid, over-stressed, under-appreciated” NHS staff.”

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2017/11/nhs-disappointed-limited-budget-funding-boost

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

22 Nov 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, DCC, East Devon Alliance, Independent Councillors, NHS (local)

Independent EDA Councillor Shaw continues the fight for our local NHS

Thank goodness for (truly) independent councillors!

“PRESS RELEASE

Devon County Council’s Health and Adult Care Scrutiny Committee will ask both the NEW Devon and South Devon & Torbay Clinical Commissioning Groups, which commission services in community hospitals, and NHS Property Services, which now owns the hospitals, to its next meeting on 25 January to report on the future of the hospitals now that most of them have lost their in-patient beds.

The Scrutiny Committee decided to request the discussion at its meeting yesterday (21st) after concerns were raised by Cllr Martin Shaw, who represents Seaton and areas close to Honiton, both places where hospital beds closed this summer. Cllr Shaw is pressing for the contributions to community hospitals made by local communities and Leagues of Friends to be taken into account in planning their futures, and had presented a paper on the subject to the Committee’s September meeting.

Cllr Shaw raised particular concerns over the high rents to be charged by NHS Property Services, the fact that the CCG is committed to paying for space only until the end of the current financial year, and that the CCG has specifically said that existing outpatient services are not guaranteed to continue.

‘Many services can be delivered in community hospitals’, Cllr Shaw emphasised after the meeting. “We should be talking about increasing not reducing the provision close to where patients live. If most services are concentrated in the RD&E, patients will continue to face long journeys into Exeter. With deteriorating public transport many will have to drive in and contribute to the city’s ever-growing congestion. We need joined-up planning at Devon and local levels to make the best use of the hospitals, which are community assets whoever is the legal owner.’

The motion to invite the NHS organisations was proposed by Cllr Claire Wright (Independent) and seconded by Cllr Nick Way (Liberal Democrat).

Martin Shaw
Independent East Devon Alliance County Councillor for Seaton & Colyton”

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

22 Nov 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Economy, Local Enterprise Partnership

South West and our LEP snubbed in budget

Lots of “talking up” by LEP members tonight – but nothing to talk up except competitive access to general “funds” that rarely seem to materialise.

Not the brightest buttons in the budget box then …!

“The Westcountry has been snubbed in major funding pledges for the UK regions.

In his budget statement yesterday, Chancellor Philip Hammond gave special mention to the Northern Power House, Midlands Engine, and high speed rail HS2 with half of a £1.7bn transforming cities pots pledged to six elected metro mayor regions.

Tim Jones, chairman of the Devon and Cornwall Business Council, said: “We have been snubbed and I’m afraid to say it, but it’s the Cinderella South West yet again.” …

… Chris Garcia, Chief Executive of the HoSW LEP said that region is primed with potential to help create the “global Britain” that the Chancellor referred to in his speech.

“However, we were disappointed not to be name checked in the speech or the budget, and that the focus is very much on specific cities with particular emphasis on those that have opted for an elected Mayor.

“It’s our aim, along with our partners in business, the local authorities and the other south west LEPs, to demonstrate the immense contribution that can be delivered from our potentially thriving region: The Great South West – which can rival the economies of the Northern Powerhouse and Midlands Engine. We need to drive this message home to the front benches of Westminster and show the country what we’re worth.”

http://www.devonlive.com/news/business/how-westcountry-been-left-hanging-818747

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

22 Nov 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Affordable and Social Housing, Austerity cuts, Conflict of interest, Developers/ Development

Comments

1 Comment

“Philip Hammond’s housebuilding company has sat on undeveloped housing plot for 7 years”

First, it should be noted that MANY of the Daily Telegraph’s readers are sitting in undeveloped housing plots!

and

Second, they don’t mention the company’s financial interest in nursing homes.

It’s a story they are pushing to attempt to get him out as he seems to be perceived as much too wimpy for the Telegraph on Brexit, but nevertheless it is a topical story, and throws up some interesting issues.

Naturally, Hammond says it is a blind trust so he’s not responsible for its decisions. However, companies have the option of behaving morally and responsibly, particularly if they are aware that their ultimate beneficial owner occupies a high-profile position where a possible potential conflict of interest will be magnified by the public gaze.

“A housebuilding business founded by Philip Hammond has been accused of sitting on an undeveloped plot of land which has been granted planning permission for four new homes.

Castlemead Limited, which was co-founded by the Chancellor in 1984, builds new homes and doctor’s surgeries.

It has been reported that Castlemead Group, which is majority-owned by the company, was granted permission to build four homes in north Wales in June 2010 on the condition work on the site would begin within five years.

However, The Times report that the site still remains undeveloped.

Mr Hammond resigned as a director of the company in 2010, but his sole entry in the most recent House of Commons’ MPs’ register makes reference to the fact that he is “a beneficiary of a trust which owns a controlling interest in Castlemead Ltd, a company engaged in construction, house building and property development”.

The revelation comes after Mr Hammond gave an interview with The Sunday Times this week, in which he hit out at house builders who are sitting on hundreds of thousands of undeveloped plots of land which have planning permission for new homes.

He said: “We are generating planning permissions at a record rate.“It’s builders banking land, it’s speculators hoarding land, it’s local authorities blocking development.”

Mr Hammond resigned as a director in 2010 and does not have any direct influence over the company’s activities.

A spokeswoman for Mr Hammond said: “Any shares in Castlemead are held in a trust. The chancellor has no direct influence or involvement and so is unable to comment.”

Castlemead did not respond to The Telegraph’s request for comment.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/11/22/philip-hammonds-housebuilding-company-has-sat-undeveloped-housing/

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

22 Nov 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Conflict of interest, Economy, Hinkley C, Local Enterprise Partnership

Hinkley Point – the case against grows stronger – part 2

MOwl’s view: meanwhile, all those board members (and former board members) of our LEP with nuclear interests are very happy – those providing the roads to the site, those building houses near the site, those recruiting staff for the site, those building new facilities for site workers and extending their colleges and universities on the back of nuclear training courses they will run. It really doesn’t matter if it is a Somerset white elephant.

AND they are using OUR money for this.

”The government has saddled families with inflated household bills for decades because of the poor deal it negotiated over the Hinkley Point nuclear plant in Somerset, MPs have said.

The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) criticised a contract awarded to EDF to build the first new nuclear station in Britain since 1995 as too expensive, with the burden falling most heavily on poorer households.

Meg Hillier, the committee’s chairwoman, accused the government of “grave strategic errors” in crafting the deal, which will leave consumers paying £30 billion in subsidies over 35 years — five times more than expected.

“Bill-payers have been dealt a bad hand by the government in its approach to this project,” she said. “Its blinkered determination to agree the Hinkley deal, regardless of changing circumstances, means that for years to come energy consumers will face costs running to many times the original estimate.”

The government signed a preliminary deal in 2013 with EDF, the French state-owned nuclear generator, to pay a fixed price of £92.50 per megawatt hour for the electricity produced by the Hinkley station for 35 years, indexed to inflation. The costs are to be met via a levy on consumer bills once the station enters service, expected to add £10 to £15 a year to the average household bill.

But when wholesale energy prices plunged sharply in 2014, amid growing doubts over the French reactor technology earmarked for use at Hinkley, following delays and cost overruns at other plants, the government failed to revisit the terms.

The PAC accused ministers of pressing ahead and locking consumers into an expensive deal.

“The economics of nuclear power in the UK have deteriorated since the government last formally considered its strategic case for nuclear in 2008,” the report said. “Estimated construction costs have increased while alternative low-carbon technologies have become cheaper. At the same time, fossil-fuel price projections have fallen.”

A spokesperson for the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy said that it was a “competitive deal”.

EDF Energy said: “The cost of Hinkley Point C for customers has not changed and they will pay nothing for its reliable, low carbon electricity until the station is completed . . . Construction is fully under way and is already delivering a huge benefit to British jobs, skills and industrial strategy.”

Hannah Martin, head of energy at Greenpeace UK, said the PAC report showed that the government should revisit the project because it “makes absolutely no financial sense”.

Source: The Times (pay wall)

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

21 Nov 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Affordable and Social Housing, Austerity cuts, Development Management Committee, Inequality

“Flagship government housing plan fails to deliver a single home in three years”

Another one of those Tory “funds” (this one supposedly £2.3 billion) that achieved NOTHING.

Question: Where DID the money go?

“A flagship government programme to deliver 200,000 discounted new homes to first-time buyers is yet to see a single one built.

The 2014 Starter Home initiative was touted as part of “a major push” to help people on the housing ladder, but officials admit delivering any properties under the scheme remains an “ambition”.

It promised to achieve its target by pushing councils and developers to bring forward unused land and build on old industrial sites, measures that Chancellor Philip Hammond will again pledge to carry out as he makes housing a key plank of his Budget on Wednesday.

The Starter Home initiative’s lack of concrete progress also comes as Labour claimed Conservative spending plans since 2010 have stripped some £20bn out of UK housebuilding projects, robbing the country of an extra 280,000 homes.

It was just before Christmas three years ago that David Cameron announced the Starter Home project, promising to build 100,000 properties and offer them to young people at a 20 per cent discount.

At the Autumn Statement in 2015, then-Chancellor George Osborne said a £2.3bn fund would help boost the number to 200,000, “in addition to those delivered through reform of the planning system”.

None have been built despite officials in 2014 saying work would begin on the homes the following year.”

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/housing-starter-homes-budget-philip-hammond-a8066571.html

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

21 Nov 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, NHS (local)

South West Ambulance service employees: open letter to public

“An apology from Ambulance staff to our families, friends and the community:
Have you ever wondered what goes on behind the scenes when you see an ambulance attending an incident what it might be like to work for the South Western Ambulance service?

Although we love what we do, behind the professional facade we portray to the public we are struggling to maintain a crumbling service deliberately being underfunded by the Government and made worse when those over pressured resources and stressed staff are then badly managed locally.

If you’re unfortunate enough to have to call us, please remember that although we will potentially often be the Deliverer of the First High Quality Care you receive in an accident or illness, we are not only not classified as an Emergency Service by the government but not appreciated or cared for by our employer.

We, as ambulance professionals, are trying to change that. Our Union, GMB, are trying to change that, but our employer and our Chief Executive are ignoring both our complaints and calls for change, so in order to explain to our families, friends and the public and even our employer SWAST we send out our heartfelt apologies:

TO THE PUBLIC:

We’re sorry for not getting to you or your loved ones quick enough because there are just not enough of us or we are called out to answer non-emergency calls.
We’re sorry for the patient and family members that have been left on the floor for hours as a consequence of not getting to you on time.
We’re sorry when you remain in the ambulance or in the hospital corridor for hours when we are stacked at A&E’s because we can’t complete our hand over.
We’re sorry that our employer is so poor in managing their resources that they are potentially putting your family at risk.
We’re sorry you sometimes feel the need to verbally abuse or physically threaten us while we treat your family and friends.
We’re sorry it appears that SWAST deployments and performance targets are more important than patient care.
We’re sorry if we arrive at your emergency at the end of a 12 hour shift and possible overrun if we are so tired we potentially fear making a wrong clinical decision.

TO OUR FAMILY AND FRIENDS:

We’re sorry for not being able to be there when you as family and friends need us.
We’re sorry for missing yet another family occasion.
We’re sorry we are refused annual leave when we want it meaning no family holiday once again.
We’re sorry yet another overrun has meant we are late home again.
We’re sorry kids that we couldn’t tuck you in and read you a story at bedtime.
We’re sorry for being so tired or stressed when we do finally get home.
We’re sorry for the occasions you’ll see us angry, frustrated, unhappy and sad.
We’re sorry when we witness yet another colleague’s relationship fail.
TO SWAST:
We’re sorry for feeling unsupported by you, our employer.
We’re sorry when we are stretched ever more thinly across a greater area of deployment that we don’t hit your targets for reaching critically ill patients in time.
We’re sorry for being sick in an environment and workplace that doesn’t allow it.
We’re sorry for what must be our annoying constant requests for annual leave and you having to take the time to respond and refuse them.
We’re sorry for our claims of PTSD.
We’re sorry for appearing ungrateful that your recent rota review has in fact destroyed our work life balance even more beyond acceptable limits.
We’re sorry for the inconvenience when injuries at work happen.
We’re sorry if we appear concerned that we will not reach retirement age as a result of physical or psychological injury.
We’re sorry for not agreeing with the Chief Executive, and his teams ‘my way or the highway’ attitude towards us as staff.

And finally in closing:

We’re sorry for saying sorry, time and time again to all of you because nothing ever changes.
We’re sorry for having to write this.
We’re sorry for asking, but it’s time for everyone to support our call for the Chief Executive to stand down.”

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

21 Nov 2017

Posted under

Austerity cuts, Economy, Inequality, Rural communities

“Rural public services funding ‘outdated and chronically unfair’ “

“Funding for public services in rural communities is “outdated and chronically unfair” when compared to towns and cities, the County Councils Network has stated.

The body, which represents county councils, has demanded the government address the ‘postcode lottery’ of government funding.

It says there are large disparities between resources allocated to rural public services and their urban counterparts.

Paul Carter, chair of the CCN, will tell the network’s annual conference today that 26 million countryside residents receive almost 50% less funding for their public services compared to their neighbours in England’s largest cities.

“Our services are threatened and under pressure like never before.

“Unless these inequalities are addressed, many of the highly valued services to our public will diminish or disappear,” he warned.

Carter highlighted that this year, collectively, England’s 37 county areas received £3.2bn less than the English average, including London and towns and cities outside rural areas.

He added: “This impacts on the daily lives on our residents, all whilst they unfairly subsidise services enjoyed in other parts of the country through higher council tax bills.

“This is outdated and chronically unfair.”

The inequality in the current system means that, on average, county councils received £650 per person for public services in 2017-18 however a city or metropolitan borough resident receives £825 for their services, whilst those in inner London enjoy £1,190 per person, the CCN said.

This gulf in funding received by different communities comes at a time when county authorities face a funding black hole of £2.54bn by 2021, caused by austerity and these funding inequalities between rural and urban areas, according to the CCN.

Carter is also expected to warn that the government’s review of local government finance will not resolve historical inequalities, and is likely to “fudge” the issue.

The CCN noted that these historical quirks mean a rural taxpayer in Leicestershire gets £428 per person for their public services, but those living, in some cases, less than a mile away in Leicester, a unitary city council, get £1,107 per person for their services – 61% more.

County leaders say they have little choice but to raise council tax to make sure the shortfall, meaning that their residents are unfairly subsidising the services enjoyed in other parts of the country.”

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2017/11/rural-public-services-funding-outdated-and-chronically-unfair

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

20 Nov 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Health and Social Care (local), NHS (local)

Save Our Hospital Services (SOHS) ‘Care Closer to Home’ survey now online

“The survey has been designed with input from a large number of people, including several healthcare professionals. Our aim is to gather as much data on the Care Closer to Home model as possible. We want to know how the model is working based on the real-life experiences of the people of Devon.

The survey can be completed as the patient or as the spouse/partner/relative/friend of the patient.”

https://surveys.sohs.org.uk

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

19 Nov 2017

Posted under

Austerity cuts, Health and Social Care (local), NHS (local)

“Help the Old”?

“In Britain we put our elderly into living graveyards, put them in a home, arrange the chairs in a half circle, turn on the heating and leave them to watch tv.

We should be copying what is happening in Amsterdam, where they have care homes with extra accommodation for students. The students get a free place to live in return for 30 hours a month assisting around the home.

For elderly people, the best medicine is youth. It energises them – ask any grandparent, We could kill two birds with one stone here, easing student debt and massive social care costs”.

Source: Sunday Times, pay wall

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

19 Nov 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Economy, Inequality

Chancellor says “there are no unemployed”

“Philip Hammond has claimed “there are no unemployed people” in the UK in a major slip-up as the chancellor prepares to fight for his political life in this week’s budget.

Speaking on the BBC’s Andrew Marr Show, Hammond made the gaffe as he argued there had been no need to worry about jobs disappearing due to technological advances such as computers in the past.

Downplaying worries about automation technologies including driverless cars, he said: “It’s a simple choice: either we embrace change or we try to hide from change and we allow ourselves to slip behind … I remember 20 years ago we were worried about what would happen to a million shorthand typists in Britain as the personal computer took over. Nobody has a shorthand typist these days. Where are all these unemployed people? There are no unemployed people. We have created 3.5m jobs since 2010. This economy has become a jobs factory.”

In fact, there are about 1.42 million unemployed people in the UK and many more who are underemployed and would like more hours. .. “

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/nov/19/there-are-no-unemployed-in-uk-says-philip-hammond-tv-gaffe?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

19 Nov 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Affordable and Social Housing, Austerity cuts, Democracy, Post-Brexit Adjustments, Privatisation

It’s a mystery

So, the Conservatives get in because, although not enough people voted for them, they could bribe the DUP with £1 billion to prop them up.

They leave it to developers to decide housing policy and the developers get mega-rich while saying they are too poor to build affordable homes and even renting a home is now beyond many (working) people.

They cut public services such as the NHS, education – to the bone.

They privatise anything that can be privatised – including the NHS and education.

What they can’t privatise, they put under the control of unaccountable quangos such as “business led” Local Enterprise Partnerships, which make Walter Mitty claims that they will get “productivity” soaring (by making sure that government money gets funnelled into THEIR companies) and councils roll over for them (they are given no choice).

Public utilities – water, gas, electricity, railways – are now all mostly owned by foreign companies which repatriate profits to their own countries.

They cut benefits whilst allowing tax dodging by rich individuals and powerful companies on a truly breathtaking scale.

They get most of their funds from donors who benefit from privatisation and austerity and tax dodging.

They say they are returning “sovereignty” to the UK but strip MPs of their voting powers.

They refuse to accept that “green energy” is now cheaper than nuclear power and fossil fuels and instead commit to a nuclear white elephant that belongs to the French and Chinese (who are ceasing building massive nuclear power stations at home and investing instead in renewables)

We won’t mention the Brexit omni-omni-mega-no-words-good-enough-for-it shambles. Except that we can, they say, rely on the United States to see us right.

Yet, come the time when it looks like their “leader” is on her last legs and a snap election may be on the horizon they tell people they are going to do “something” about housing and the NHS – as if the mess they are in is not their fault. Perhaps a commission, perhaps a policy paper, perhaps a “consultation” … perhaps.

A little money will be shaken from the magic money tree (soon to be swallowed up by not-so-magic higher prices).

And thousands of people will say “Good enough for me – I’ll vote for them again”.

Truly we live in strange and frightening times.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

17 Nov 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Affordable and Social Housing, Austerity cuts, EDDC, Housing (local)

How many council houses equals a new headquarters?

The £10 million being spent on the new EDDC HQ could pay for 80 new council houses in our district.

Yes, EDDC will say it will SAVE money.

BUT if EDDC had properly maintained Knowle over the last 10+ years as it should have, they would not have needed to move.

“Councils are on course to spend more than £1bn on commercial property this year, investing more in shopping centres, country clubs, hotels, offices and other assets than in building council houses, figures show.

Town halls in England and Wales spent £758m buying up commercial property in the first eight months of this year, according to property market data from Savills, but are only building 1,730 council houses a year, government figures for 2016-17 show.

The £1bn councils are on track to spend could produce more than 8,000 new council homes, an expert estimate suggests. Earlier this year, Downing Street indicated that amount could deliver 12,500 homes.

While no nationwide figure is available for the total cost to the taxpayer of council houses built in 2016-17, expert estimates putting the cost per property at up to £125,000 would suggest local authorities spent in the region of £250m. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/nov/17/councils-commercial-property-spend-council-housing-housebuilding

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

17 Nov 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, DCC, Democracy, EDDC, Great South West LEP, Greater Exeter, Local Enterprise Partnership, Scrutiny, Transparency

Comments

1 Comment

“ Abolish Devon district and borough councils to create super authority’ “

BUT, BUT, BUT – it’s already happening – EXCEPT we are keeping district councillors on the payroll!

Why does Owl say this?

Currently we have (at least) these new bureaucratic (and non-accountable) quangos in our area:

The Heart of the South West Local Enterprise Council
The “Greater Sourh West” group of LEPs
The “Joint Committee” of councils, NHS quangos and others in Devon and Somerset
“Greater Exeter”

and others working in the shadows.

In the middle of all this East Devon District Council is paying millions to build a new HQ and has not reduced its staff numbers throughout the period of austerity.

Questions … questions … but none of these groups are answerable to us and all choose how much (or more likely, how little) scrutiny they wish to have.

“The Government could deliver a £31 billion boost to the economy over five years by abolishing 201 district and borough councils in England and handing over their powers to county halls, a new report has said.

The report from think tank ResPublica calls for the abolition of the historic two-tier system of local government, which sees most rural areas of England covered by both a county council and a smaller district or borough authority with sometimes overlapping responsibilities.

ResPublica director Phillip Blond said the system is causing “needless confusion”, as businesses and developers find their plans frustrated by “parochial” decision-making on strategic issues.

Ditching the two-tier system and following the example of unitary councils adopted by most cities would help iron out wide variations in productivity which see workers in Cornwall take five days to produce the same value that can be delivered in three days in Surrey, he said.

With uncertain economic conditions after Brexit, the report said it was “vital” for counties to be prepared to weather the possible storm, particularly as those which voted most strongly to leave the EU are thought to be most vulnerable to any decline in trade resulting from it.

“The needless confusion that frustrates the ambitions of business and government alike in our county areas must end now,” Mr Blond said.

“With Brexit on the horizon and our city-regions already benefiting from devolution, we can’t afford the waste and complication that the current system creates.

“Single councils at the county scale are the future and we call on the Government to move rapidly to encourage them.”

Baroness Jane Scott, the leader of Wiltshire Council, said the move to a unitary authority in the county in 2009 had been a “great success” and warned that counties which fail to follow its lead face “the real risk of … being left behind”.

“Streamlining counties will contribute billions to the national economy and will be good for business,” said Lady Scott, the County Councils Network’s spokeswoman on reform.

“But the real winners are local residents who will benefit from improved public services, less bureaucracy, and access to more housing and facilities that meet local need and demand.”

The report will be launched at the County Council Network’s annual conference on November 20.

A spokesman for the Department for Communities and Local Government said: “Moving to a single tier large unitary authority can often give residents a better deal for their local taxes, improved local services, less bureaucracy and stronger and more accountable local leadership.

“However, we are clear that any such move must be both locally led and have support from the community.”

http://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/abolish-devon-district-borough-councils-790015

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

16 Nov 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, East Devon economy, Joint Committee, Local Enterprise Partnership

More pain for our LEP’s “productivity strategy”

Office for Budget Responsibility downgrades its productivity growth targets.

Will our councillors on the “Joint Committee” with our LEP show similar responsibility?

“… The Office for National Statistics reported last week that the UK’s level of productivity fell 0.3 per cent in the three months to June, meaning that the national output per hour worked is below where it was in the final quarter of 2007, almost a decade ago.

The OBR said that the recent productivity fall was “almost certainly” exacerbated by the impact of the 2016 Brexit vote, but it added that the weakness in productivity since the financial crisis was a global phenomenon too.

The OBR had projected in March that UK productivity would grow by 1.6 per cent in 2017, by1.5 per cent in 2018, by 1.7 per cent in 2019, and 1.8 per cent in 2020.

“It no longer seems central to assume that productivity growth will recover to the 1.8 per cent we assumed in March 2017 within five years,” the OBR said on Tuesday.

“We expect to lower our forecast for cumulative potential productivity growth significantly over the next five years, without going so far as to assume that there is no recovery at all from the very weak performance of recent years.”

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/uk-productivity-growth-latest-treasury-watchdog-forecaster-november-budget-public-finances-philip-a7992326.html

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

16 Nov 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Health and Social Care (local), NHS (local)

Austerity is “economic murder” say academics in British Medical Journal

Where EXACTLY are the “12,700 more doctors and 10,600 more nurses” the government says we have had since 2010? How many have left during that time? How many are employed in the privatesector treating private patients? And IF we HAVE had them why are avoidable deaths rising?

“An extra 120,000 patients have died in the past seven years following cuts to health and social care budgets, a major study has found.

The patients were all over 60 and the majority died in care homes or their own homes, rather than in hospital.

Researchers from Cambridge University likened the cuts to ‘economic murder’ and said local NHS and social care funding means vulnerable patients are not receiving the help they badly need.

They also linked a fall in nurse numbers, particularly to district nurses who work in the community, to the additional deaths.

The study by Cambridge, Oxford and University College London is the first of its kind to look at the effects of funding reductions.

It is based on a computer model which calculated how many deaths should have occurred between 2010 and 2017, based on the number of deaths from 2000 to 2010.

It also predicted that if the current trends continue, there would be another 100 excess deaths a day between now and 2020. Researchers said that, although they could not prove the deaths were caused by the fall in health and social care spending, there was a very strong link.

One of the lead authors, Professor Lawrence King, from Cambridge University, said: ‘It is now very clear that austerity does not promote growth or reduce deficits – it is bad economics, but good class politics.

‘This study shows it is also a public health disaster. It is not an exaggeration to call it economic murder.’

The study, published in the BMJ Open journal, is complicated and the researchers admitted there may be other ‘factors’ behind the increased deaths such as the fact the population is ageing, unhealthy lifestyles and deprivation.

Dr Ben Maruthappu of University College London, senior author of the study, said: ‘While the Government’s investment into social care earlier this year is welcome, it is clear that more must be done, with better modernisation of services, and protection of health and social care funding.’ The research also found that previous rises in life expectancy rates had stalled.

The average woman was living 3.8 months less than previous predictions and the average man 5.2 months less.

Life expectancy rates are 82.9 for women and 79.2 years for men. The findings come amid calls from the medical profession for the Government to substantially increase health and social care funding in next Wednesday’s Budget. A Department of Health spokesman said: ‘As the researchers themselves note, this study cannot be used to draw any firm conclusions about the cause of excess deaths.

‘The NHS is treating more people than ever before and funding is at record levels with an £8billion increase by 2020-21. We’ve also backed adult social care with a £2billion investment, and we have 12,700 more doctors and 10,600 more nurses on our wards since May 2010.’ “

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-5087527/NHS-cuts-blamed-120-000-extra-deaths.html