Category Archives: Austerity cuts

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

1 Mar 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Police (local)

Torridge council leader criticises Police and Crime Commissioner

“A council leader from Devon has hit out at the area’s Police and Crime Commissioner over the “dramatic” reduction of PCSOs over the next four years.

More than half (190) of the region’s 340 Police and Community Support Officers (PCSOs) are to be lost in the next four years.

In their place, 100 new uniformed officers, 50 civilian investigators and 30 record takers will “re-connect” communities with the force, Chief Constable Shaun Sawyer announced in February. Torridge District Council leader Jane Whittaker has written to the county’s Police and Crime Commissioner, Alison Hernandez.

In her letter Mrs Whittaker acknowledges the need for new police officers but worries about “how a district like Torridge will survive when these numbers are so reduced. In such a rural district as Torridge the impact of the reduction of our PCSOs will be dramatic,” said Mrs Whittaker.

“They are the regular presence in every sense in terms of visible policing in Torridge.

“As it is, their role is hugely stretched because of the size of the areas they look after, but, that said, they remain the only tangible presence whenever there is a need to deal with the varied number of, what to the Force are, smaller criminal incidents.

“What I wish to learn from you is how a district like Torridge will survive when these numbers are so reduced that there will simply be no lesser crime addressing/problem solving capacity available throughout a large area of the district.

She added: “Torridge is only just about surviving in this respect with the current numbers in place, reduce these and the landscape will be all but barren.”

Mrs Whittaker is awaiting a reply from Ms Hernandez.”

http://www.devonlive.com/torridge-is-just-about-surviving-says-council-leader-worried-by-dramatic-pcso-cuts/story-30171340-detail/story.html

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

28 Feb 2017

Posted under

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

Comments

1 Comment

Community Hospital bed cuts: public consultation doesn’t give answers CCG wanted

Public consultation – ok for Brexit, not ok for NHS!

“A public consultation over which community beds health commissioners will axe in Exeter or East Devon has seen the majority of people vote for different oppositions, rather than the four being proposed.

NHS Northern, Eastern and Western (NEW) Devon Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) is planning to close 72 community hospital beds in Devon, and is due to make its decision this Thursday. In the options Tiverton hospital will definitely remain open, and Honiton and Okehampton will close. The fate of beds in Seaton, Exmouth, Sidmouth and Whipton remains uncertain.

The aim of the consultation document called Your Future Care is to provide care and support at home and in the community for the elderly and frail, where the various providers of services work together to promote the health and wellbeing of residents, preventing unnecessary hospital admissions and supporting a faster return home.

The Your Future Care survey results show 624 people voted for other options such as suggesting different three site hospitals such as Okehampton, Tiverton and Exmouth; having four site options such as Tiverton, Sidmouth, Seaton, and Exmouth; and retaining all existing beds which accounted for 168 of responses.

The second most popular choice was option A – 32 beds in Tiverton, 24 beds in Seaton and 16 beds in Exmouth – with 554 votes, followed by option B with 159 votes, and option C – 32 beds in Tiverton, 24 beds in Seaton and 16 beds in Whipton – with 65 votes. The least popular was option D – 32 beds in Tiverton, 24 in Sidmouth and 16 beds in Whipton – with 50 votes.

During the consultation, the CCG’s governing body received five petitions. They included one from Sidmouth Victoria Hospital Comforts Fund which was signed by 5,497 to prevent the closure of Sidmouth Hospital’s inpatient ward; a petition signed by 3,579 people to save Okehampton Hospital beds, and 3,227 people signed a Hands off Honiton Hospital petition.

Also opposing proposals to reduce community beds is Community Hospitals Association (CHA), and Devon County Council has called for a halt in the plans while it calls on the government and NHS England to provide fair funding for health services in Devon.

Hard to reach groups were consulted during focus groups organised by Healthwatch Devon. No one option was most preferred, and people said they wanted services to be as close to home as possible. Many people felt enabling patients to remain at home and avoid a hospital stay is a good thing.

During the consultation a significant number of questions relating to how the New Model of Integrated Care (NMOC) will work in practice was raised, including concerns about a possible decline in patient safety for vulnerable groups such as the frail, elderly, and dementia patients.

While there was noticeable support for the principle of care at home, many correspondents felt the NMOC had not been suitably or clearly explained, so they were unable to support the proposal.

A high number of people raised topics such as fear of isolation, strain on carers and worsening patient outcomes for individuals with more seriousness illness.

The final decision will be made by NEW Devon CCG’s governing body at a publicly held meeting of NEW Devon CCG’s governing body at Exeter Racecourse at 1pm. It has previously stated its preferred choice as being option A.

More changes are also on the way. Devon’s acute hospital stroke, maternity and urgent care services are the latest to come under scrutiny as part of ongoing plans to transform the regions health care. By this summer, NEW Devon CCG and South Devon and Torbay CCG aims to have drawn up proposals for the future delivery of the three services.”

http://www.devonlive.com/devon-residents-vote-for-other-options-than-those-proposed-over-community-beds-cuts/story-30168539-detail/story.html

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

28 Feb 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Democracy, Developers/ Development, Devolution, Local Enterprise Partnership, Transparency

Comments

2 Comments

When and how does devolution become a scam?

Georgina Allen:


“Looking at the papers at the moment, there is a stark contrast to be witnessed – on the one hand, local people out in the rain and cold, holding bedraggled posters, begging for hospitals to be saved, for school funds not to be cut, for councils to hold strong against insistent developers – while on the other hand, the self-congratulations of business people and the LEP, the Heart of the South West Local Enterprise Partnership, on winning yet another enormous handout from the government – £43.56 million this time. This brings their total budget to over £200 million.

Where has this £43 million come from? If the government can’t find money to help keep local hospitals open, how can they suddenly produce this huge windfall? Council budgets here in the South West have been reduced on average by about 40%, forcing councils to cut back on essential services.

Local councils are having to make some very difficult decisions. They are being kept afloat by income from the New Homes Bonuses, money which they are given for every house built. This however, puts them at odds with their constituents, who see thousands of unaffordable new houses spreading over their fields, damaging agriculture, tourism and local infrastructure. Council taxes have gone up, business rates have gone up, services are being cut, yet suddenly this huge windfall has appeared.

The LEP, who have been given this bonanza to share out, are an interesting organisation to be responsible for this amount of public money. They are a self-elected group of business people and councillors. The majority of business represented are from the construction industry. There are also representatives from the arms industry, cyber technology, the nuclear industry and people with financial interests in house building. Their meetings are held in private, they are unaccountable and are not required to be transparent. They are responsible for the division of an enormous amount of public money and yet their board represents the construction industries who benefit the most from the windfall, leading to many awkward conflicts of interest.

Their choices on where to spend this money reflect their own interests too closely in my opinion. Money, which it can be argued, has been taken from council funds, is being sent to fund an upgrade to the train station in Plymouth, to help a proposed new town on the edge of Newton Abbot, to build a high technology centre in Torbay.

All of this investment is good of course, but if it comes at the expense of our hospitals, schools and roads, then questions need to be asked about who is making the decision on where that money goes. If money is being drained from council funds and the public purse to build massive new developments, developments which benefit the businesses that the people making the decisions are in charge of, then the public need to be a lot more informed than they are.

In light of the recent scandals shaking LEPs in other areas, as reported by the Times and the Mail, it would make a lot of sense to ask for a great deal more transparency. To quote the Times article, “Millions of pounds have been spent, however, on businesses run by board members of the partnerships or on the companies of people close to them.” I’m sure our LEP have done nothing wrong, so a little more openness in the way they function cannot hurt.

The lack of openness is especially worrying when you see how fundamentally the changes that the LEP are behind, are changing the face of Devon and Somerset. Housing for example – the LEP have come up with a figure of 169,000 new houses needed for Devon and Somerset.

How have they come up with this figure?

Nobody seems to know – several councillors in my local area of the South Hams have asked and as they put it, ‘have been fobbed off’. The LEP don’t need to answer questions and you can’t do a freedom of information on them as they are not a public body. It’s mentioned that this figure is possibly based on local housing needs assessments – so where do these housing assessments come from? How does a town like Newton Abbot, which has had a static or declining population for many years, suddenly need to double in size according to a ‘local housing need assessment’? I was told by a chief planning officer that he didn’t understand the way they were calculated. I would argue that they are based on market needs not local needs.

Who will benefit then from having a high housing figure? Well the people who develop the land will and it is unfortunate that so many of them are sitting on the board of the LEP. It doesn’t inspire confidence. Many of the houses that have been built are not selling, but that doesn’t seem to stop the LEP and various councils represented on its board, from producing larger and larger plans – the one for a Greater Exeter has just come out.

If they want local people to support them, they must explain where the money is going and why. They must put the money into supporting agriculture, tourism, the environment and services instead of just endless, huge infrastructural projects. They must consult and discuss properly and answer freedom of information requests, otherwise like the other scandal-ridden LEPs, it will just resemble a scam. A scam whereby local services are cut and public money is diverted into supporting private industry and how does that really help any of us.”

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

28 Feb 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Asset sweating, Austerity cuts, DCC, Economy, EDDC

Public services unsustainable and will bounce from crisis to crisis say think-tanks

“The UK faces the prospect of failing public services and breached spending controls unless urgent action is taken, the Institute for Government and CIPFA have warned.

The think-tank has partnered with the accountancy body to deliver an assessment of key public services in light of increasing cuts imposed by central government.

The Performance Tracker review concludes that until recently, Whitehall was able to maintain the performance of public services while cutting spending. However, the report highlighted that the government’s own data indicates the existing approach has “run out of steam.”

The authors urged the chancellor Philip Hammond to demonstrate in next week’s Budget that his spending decisions were based on “realistic assessments”.

They added that, in the near future, the government risks “bouncing from spending crisis to crisis” against the backdrop of contentious and potentially divisive Brexit negotiations.

The report identified the key pressures on adult social care, hospitals and the prison services. It noted that people were waiting longer for critical hospital services such as A&E and cancer treatments, and highlighted delays in transferring people from hospitals into social care have risen by 40% since 2014. Meanwhile, violence in prisons has risen sharply, with assaults on staff increasing by 61% in two years.

Among the recommendations made by the report was for the assumptions behind government’s spending decisions to be subject to independent scrutiny. As such, Whitehall should consider creating an institution similar to the Office for Budget Responsibility for public spending, which could help “embed efficiency within public sector decision making and prevent wishful thinking.”

Rob Whiteman, chief executive of CIPFA, said: “We know that for some parts of the public sector resources are stretched and that those working to deliver services are up against it. What is crucial is that we make the best possible use of the funds available.”

A thorough understanding of how organisations are run and services provided was key, “using this information to think strategically and creatively about improving policy decision making, which will ultimately improve service delivery.”

Julian McCrae, deputy director of the IfG, added the government was entering a cycle of “crisis, cash, repeat.” He emphasised the new report was not a call for money but rather, “a call for better financial planning” and reforms robust enough to endure public scrutiny.

“It is fundamental to increasing the effectiveness of these public services that ministers, officials and the public know how well government is performing, and use this information to guide decisions,” he stated.

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2017/02/cipfa-and-ifg-issue-pre-budget-warning-over-public-service-sustainability

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

27 Feb 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Voting

Lincolnshire can’t vote on unitary authority on same day as elections – instead must shell out extra £1 million

“The Leader of Lincolnshire County Council, Cllr Martin Hill, has accepted that its proposal for a poll of residents on the creation of a unitary authority for the area cannot go ahead after some districts refused to be involved.

Earlier this month it was revealed that the districts had received legal advice from Timothy Straker QC of 4-5 Gray’s Inn Square suggesting that any attempt by the county council to combine their elections with such a referendum would be unlawful.

According to the City of Lincoln Council, Straker’s opinion said the plans were “contrary to the Election Rules and fraught with danger of litigation.”
Lincoln argued that this meant, in effect, “the referendum would need to be held completely separately or on a different day, incurring costs to Lincolnshire taxpayers of around £1m”.

Cllr Hill, Leader of the county council, had sought to argue that holding a poll on 4 May, when many residents would already be going out to vote in county council elections, would have kept administrative costs to a minimum and encouraged a high turnout.

“Unfortunately, it won’t now be possible to hold a poll on 4 May, which is deeply disappointing,” he said.

“For various reasons, some of the county’s seven district councils – the bodies responsible for conducting the elections – are not prepared to co-operate. Although I don’t personally agree with their legal and other objections, the county council can’t require them to help with the holding of a poll.”

At a meeting of Lincolnshire County Council last week councillors voted to seek the views of residents on the principle of moving to a unitary system of local government.

After receipt of the legal advice earlier this month, Cllr Ric Metcalfe, Leader of City of Lincoln, said (on 17 February): “If the county council had consulted on this proposal [for a poll on local government reorganisation] with any of the district councils prior to their announcement, we could have raised our concerns then. Sadly, they did not.”

He added: “I and my district colleagues are in favour of a collective debate on the future of local government in Lincolnshire, but to hold a referendum at such an early stage in discussions is ludicrous, especially at such massive cost.”

Describing the proposal for a unitary council for the whole of Lincolnshire as “ridiculous”, Cllr Metcalfe said: “We are one of the largest counties in the UK and contain a diverse range of areas with significantly differing challenges and needs….

“A county unitary would be too remote a tier of government – district councils are best placed to deliver services that meet the needs of all their residents and businesses and we want to protect these services. This will not happen under a county unitary.”

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=30216%3Acounty-plan-for-poll-on-unitary-scuppered-after-districts-refuse-to-co-operate&catid=59&Itemid=27

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

25 Feb 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Affordable and Social Housing, Austerity cuts, Developers/ Development, Greater Exeter

Got a bit of green space? Greater Exeter would LOVE to build on it

https://www.gesp.org.uk/consultations/call-for-sites/

and a (pointless) “consultation” document here:

https://www.gesp.org.uk/consultations/issues/

Since, as usual, all done and dusted.

Big expansion to Newton Abbott already moving on, same with the Teignbridge side of Exeter at Alphington and at Cranbrook – and all the partner councils happy to allow development anywhere and everywhere else. Unless you are in Exeter, in which case all housing will probably be student housing.

The East Devon Local Plan was supposed to cover us till 2030. This one goes from now to 2040.

Local Plans for 4 councils (ours taking nearly a decade to pass) all to be ripped up as no longer worth the paper they were (eventually) written on.

And, whilst all this is going on, EDDC’s main preoccupation is spend millions of pounds of our money to relocate to a site that could be redundant before they ever set foot in it.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

22 Feb 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Claire Wright, Council tax, DCC, Democracy, Hugo Swire

Comments

1 Comment

“All bar one Devon Conservative MPs vote in favour of massive cuts to councils AGAIN”

From the blog of Claire Wright – the MP we needed and should have had.

“Wednesday, 22 February 2017

Every Devon Conservative MP voted in favour of massive cuts to councils this afternoon, except Anne Marie Morris who abstained.

This includes Hugo Swire, who today rather ironically tweeted an article starting with the sentence: “I’m not very rebellious by nature and I don’t think I have ever defied the party whip…”

Devon County Council had written to Devon MPs last month, urging them to vote against the crippling cuts for the third year running and I had written to Hugo Swire also for the third year running, with exactly the same request.

Last night, Devon County Council leader, Cllr John Hart told the BBC he thought the government handling of the local government finance arrangements was a “shambles” because the council was legally forced to set its budget before even receiving the details of the latest round of funding from government.

Then the funding news was received at 11pm on Monday night just 36 hours before MPs would be examining the information for debate and vote in parliament.

John Hart although a conservative council leader, has the guts to stand up to his party seniors at Westminster and openly criticise them. Something he does often and he should be given credit for this.

What a shame our MPs aren’t made of similar stern stuff.

On a more serious note, and this is serious, I was pretty shocked at the paltry numbers of MPs who were present for the debate this afternoon. I think I counted about 30, for what should have been an absolutely key parliamentary sitting as its impact on constituents, especially vulnerable people, is likely to be significant.

Local government secretary of state, Sajid Javid uttered a few warm but empty words about what a fine job councils do, before explaining that they will get no government funding whatsoever after 2019. They will be expected to survive on business rates and council tax income only after this.

This is the seventh year of austerity and Devon County Council has now lost over half of its budget to government cuts. It has coped as best it can but studying the risk assessments in the budget scrutiny papers last month made for sobering reading.

Read here for more detail: http://www.claire-wright.org/index.php/post/fewer_devon_people_to_receive_social_care_as_23m_is_slashed_from_budgets

Returning to the subject of the sadly expected but weak-willed vote by East Devon’s MP, Hugo Swire, how can he justify on the one hand complaining about underfunding for social care – the responsibility of Devon County Council and underfunding of our schools – also under Devon County Council – and then be absent during the parliamentary funding cuts debate, sneaking to the lobby only afterwards to vote in favour of the cuts?

The answer is he can’t. He has simply proved once again that he puts his party before his constituents.

Every time.”

Image

Posted by

Posted on

22 Feb 2017

Posted under

Austerity cuts, Education (local)

Comments

1 Comment

“Government spending billions on free schools while existing schools crumble”

“Ministers are choosing to give billions of pounds to build new free schools while existing schools are crumbling into disrepair, Whitehall’s spending watchdog has found.

The National Audit Office has calculated that £6.7bn is needed to bring existing school buildings in England and Wales to a satisfactory standard.

The then education minister Michael Gove pledged two years ago to create 500 free schools by 2020. Auditors have concluded that the Department for Education is facing a £2.5bn bill to purchase land to build them.

In a report released on Wednesday, auditors have questioned whether the plans for so many new free schools will be value for money.

Responding to the report, Meg Hillier, the Labour chair of the public accounts committee, called for the money assigned to new free schools to be diverted to existing buildings. “This is taxpayers’ money that could be used to fund much-needed improvements in thousands of existing school buildings,” she said.

Auditors found that the education department has already spent £863m on land acquisitions for free schools over the last five years – in some cases paying premium prices because of a shortage of suitable sites.

While free schools were helping to meet the demand for additional school places in some areas, the NAO said that because local authorities did not control their numbers they were not necessarily “fully aligned” with their needs.

Some free schools were opening in areas where there were already plenty of places, creating “spare capacity” that could taffect the future financial sustainability of other schools in the area, it said. The education department has estimated that of the 113,500 new places being opened in mainstream free schools between 2015 and 2021, 57,000 would create spare capacity in other nearby schools, potentially affecting their future funding.

Official data indicated creation of spare places in 52 free schools which opened in 2015 alone would have a “moderate or high impact” on the funding of 282 other schools.

At the same time, the NAO warned the condition of existing schools was worsening, with around 40% of the schools estate built between 1945 and 1976 coming up for replacement or major refurbishment.

As a result, the cost of restoring all schools to a satisfactory condition was expected to double over the course of the five years to 2020-21. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2017/feb/22/government-spending-billions-on-free-schools-while-existing-schools-crumble

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

21 Feb 2017

Posted under

Austerity cuts, Health and Social Care (local), NHS (local), Ottery St Mary

Ottery St Mary hospital to lose stroke unit

“Health bosses say the move will benefit patients, who will be able to access more ‘joined-up’ care, 24-hour medical cover and a range of specialist staff.

But it presents a further blow to Ottery’s community-funded hospital – that has hosted eastern Devon’s stroke unit on a temporary basis since November 2014 – following the decision to cuts all of the town’s inpatient beds in July 2015.

The move back to the RD&E is the final stage in completing recommendations from a 2013 consultation led by Northern, Eastern and Western Devon Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) and the Stroke Association.

RD&E stroke consultant Martin James said: “Moving the stroke rehabilitation unit onto the same site as our acute stroke unit is a key part of plans to improve stroke services for all people in Exeter and eastern Devon.

“The move will see a range of specialists – including nurses, physiotherapists, occupational therapists, dieticians, and speech and language therapists – working closely together to provide seamless care for people with stroke. Patients will benefit from greater continuity in care and 24-hour medical cover on site and staff will form part of a bigger specialist team, with increased opportunities to develop skills and gain input from a range of stroke specialists.”

The stroke rehabilitation facility will be transferred to the RD&E’s Yealm Ward and hospital rehabilitation services currently sited there are due to relocate into the community as part of a move towards caring for people in their own homes.

The RD&E NHS Foundation Trust says this is part of efforts to improve outcomes for frail and older people by reducing reliance on inpatient hospital care which, it says, can impact negatively on people’s rehabilitation.

In addition to the new facility on Yealm Ward, stroke patients will continue to benefit from the ‘Early Supported Discharge (ESD)’ initiative across eastern Devon.

This service enables people to return home as soon as possible after a stroke by providing support, specialist care and rehabilitation in patients’ own houses.

The trust says evidence shows that patients who receive ESD spend less time in hospital and can have better outcomes.

Adel Jones, the RD&E’s integration director, said: “These changes will help improve clinical outcomes for our patients and ensure that services are delivered where they are most effective. This means providing the best acute care possible for the critically ill in hospital and helping people who are able to be discharged rehabilitate in their own homes with the right support and interventions.”

http://www.midweekherald.co.uk/news/ottery_st_mary_hospital_to_lose_stroke_unit_1_4897659

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

18 Feb 2017

Posted under

Austerity cuts, Business Rates, EDDC, Small and Medium businesses

Do our councils have plans for the effect of increased business rates on small businesses?

“Tory ministers were so concerned about the impact of business rates on the high street that they were planning extra financial support before the election, The Telegraph has learned, but the plans were later abandoned.

The Communities Department is understood to have grown worried that retailers were getting “completely clobbered” under the current business rates formula and worked with the Treasury to better protect the sector.

Plans were developed throughout 2014 and a review published before the 2015 election, but a Tory victory and a reshuffle saw the changes never adopted, with more modest reforms adopted instead.

The revelation that recent senior Conservative politicians were ready to act to protect the high street will fuel calls for Theresa May’s government to help those worst affected by an upcoming rates change.

For the first time in seven years business rates are being updated in line with property prices this April, leaving some firms facing increases of up to 400 per cent.

Small business owners have warned they face being driven out of business by the change, but government figures say the majority of firms will see no increase in their rates.” …

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

18 Feb 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Devolution, Economy, Local Enterprise Partnership

Spot the LEP buzz words!

“… Chairman of the Heart of the South West Local Enterprise Partnership, Steve Hindley, said: “The Heart of the South West LEP is working closely with our Local Authority-led Devolution partners to create a Productivity Plan that aligns with government strategy to leverage the maximum investment of resources and confidence in this area.” …

Read more at http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/why-productivity-is-the-buzzword-in-the-south-west/story-30143842-detail/story.html

Owl’s translation: We are all working really hard using YOUR money to make ourselves richer and richer and you poorer and poorer!

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

17 Feb 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Claire Wright, Council tax, DCC, Health and Social Care (local), NHS (local)

Claire Wright (DCC Independent) on budget cuts and council tax rise

“More services and backroom functions are being cut, including road maintenance, community composting payments, as well as funding for vulnerable children and adults services – see here for more:

http://www.claire-wright.org/index.php/post/fewer_devon_people_to_receive_social_care_as_23m_is_slashed_from_budgets

Government ministers, who have forced councils, and as a consequence, citizens (mainly vulnerable ones and those on low incomes) across the country into austerity have this year allowed councils to increase tax to higher levels, to offset in a very small way the massive cuts they have made to council budgets.

This year the government has slashed £23m from Devon County Council’s budgets – a 15 per cent cut in the seventh year of austerity.

According to the scrutiny budget papers of 30 January, fewer people will be eligible for social care, due to budgetary pressures. Page 88 states: “This (budget) requires an overall reduction in the number of clients to achieve budget levels.”

It goes on to state on page 89: “The scale of change is likely to severely test the capacity of managers at different levels, especially where pressures of essential work cannot be reprioritised without risk to those who receive services.”

Over half of Devon County Council’s budget has now been cut since 2010. More than £267 million over the last seven years.

The council tax rise will cost the average Band D council taxpayer £1.16 a week extra. Devon County Council leader, John Hart said in a press release: “I believe we are justified in asking for that to help protect and support some of the most vulnerable people in society.”

Of course, he really has no choice with the crisis in social care in Devon. This year’s social care budget was around £5m overspent due to increasing costs of care and massive government budget cuts.

While £1.16 a week extra might be shrugged off by people who are comfortably off. Others on a tight budget, those who are struggling to pay debts and bills, will regard it as yet another burden..

Yesterday both the Libdems and the Labour groups amended the budget with their own versions. The conservative majority voted through their budget, with the Labour, Libdems and Independents voting against.

The government claims it can’t afford to look after its sick, its vulnerable and its elderly, so it encourages councils to increase council tax instead so pushing a double burden onto residents.

Charging the taxpayer ever increasing sums of money for poorer and fewer services. Not only do residents have to pay more but they have to undertake more care themselves.

And of course, this isn’t the only council tax rise that people will have to swallow. The likelihood is that district councils will hike their tax, Devon and Cornwall Police has already announced it is increasing its council tax and the fire authority will also surely, like they did last year.

That’s a massive year on year increase in council tax, for fewer and poorer services. Each year as the cost to taxpayers rise, the services get sparser and poorer.

According to a report out this week almost a third of the population of Britain is living on an ‘inadequate’ income. More people than ever are using foodbanks and homelessness has rocketed since the beginning of austerity.

How do ministers sleep at night knowing that it is their policies, their ideology, their own selfish version of how they believe a society should operate, that are causing this awful hardship? And we are the fifth or sixth largest economy in the world.

Hugo Swire MP has expressed concern about social care funding and the closure of hospital beds last autumn.

But if Hugo Swire was REALLY concerned and REALLY serious about these issues, he would vote AGAINST the council budget cuts in the House of Commons next Wednesday afternoon (23 February).

I wrote to him earlier this month – see

http://www.claire-wright.org/index.php/post/hugo_swire_urged_to_speak_and_vote_against_local_government_settlement

But so far, each year he, along with his conservative colleagues have quietly voted in favour, hoping no one will notice.

Once again this year, I will notice. And I will sure everyone notices – how he and his colleagues vote.

Because this vote surely goes to the heart of whether Mr Swire really cares about his constituents or is little more than a party yes man.”

We will see.

Here’s the webcast of yesterday’s budget meeting – https://devoncc.public-i.tv/core/portal/webcast_interactive/244712

http://www.claire-wright.org/index.php/post/devon_countys_council_tax_to_rise_by_almost_five_per_cent_as_services_slash

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

17 Feb 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Asset sweating, Austerity cuts, Health and Social Care (local), NHS (local), Sleaze, Spin

New business rates 19% higher for NHS hospitals, 9.6% higher for private hospitals

“People are saying local authorities shouldn’t have to develop local funding solutions to the meeting the rising costs of adult social care. This article reveals another challenging irony in the context of the devolution of financial responsibility. Local authorities are going to become increasingly dependent on business rates and yet by so doing they will potentially, as an unintended consequence, drive up the costs of healthcare in their localities.

In a world where we have been able to do so many technically brilliant things we must be capable of finding a better way forward than the chaos, which is beginning to embed itself at the heart of the way we pay for our services. There is a strong argument to suggest this policy, when allied to ongoing cuts to central Government funding for local authorities involves taking money out of the NHS to fill the gap left by Government cuts. This article tells us:

The government is under growing pressure to stop a sharp increase in business rates for hospitals that threatens to increase the strain on the NHS.

Changes to the business rates system mean that the 1,249 NHS hospitals liable for the property tax will see their bills increasing by £322m, or 21%, over the next five years from April.

However, a growing number of politicians are calling for the government to reconsider the tax hike for hospitals, including making them eligible for the same 80% discount that charities enjoy.

Some private healthcare providers, such as Nuffield Health, already enjoy an 80% discount because they are registered as charities. Furthermore, the business rates that the 581 private hospitals do pay will not increase as much as it will for hospitals.

The rateable value of private hospitals has increased by 9.6% in the last revaluation while NHS hospitals have seen a 19.8% rise, according to research by the property consultant CVS.

The cross-party group of politicians who have already expressed concern about the tax rise for hospitals include Steve McCabe, Labour MP for Birmingham Selly Oak, Royston Smith, Conservative MP for Southampton Itchen, and Annie Wells, Conservative and Unionist MSP for Glasgow.”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/feb/15/government-urged-stop-tax-hikes-nhs-hospitals-business-rates

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

16 Feb 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Health and Social Care (local), NHS (local), Scrutiny, Sleaze, Spin, Transparency

Comments

1 Comment

Dame Ruth Carnall (Devon CCG chair): more questions, no answers

“Candy Udwin, from Camden Keep NHS Public

A CONTROVERSIAL shake-up in the way north London’s health services are run has already led to a cash bonanza for private companies, the New Journal can reveal.

While campaigners and some local politicians are still warning that the overhaul – known as the Sustainability and Transformation Plan (STP) – is cover for deep NHS cuts, the process has already begun, with consultants brought into advise on the changes.

Around £2.3million has been paid out by Camden Clinical Commissioning Group in return for help in drawing up a 68-page plan, which looks at how spending across five boroughs, including Camden and Islington, could be reduced by £1billion by 2022.

It has been criticised for being an obscure document which does not make clear where savings are going to be made.

Details of the payments to consultants show how one firm received more than £600,000 to set up and manage the STP office before a permanent team was hired and space offered up at Camden Council’s headquarters at 5 Pancras Square in King’s Cross.

Mark Porter, chairman of the British Medical Association’s council, said: “Doctors will find it galling to see that so much vital resource has been handed to consultancy firms for their part in failing plans which, ultimately, may never come to fruition, while frontline staff struggle to provide safe patient care in a service increasingly becoming unfit for purpose.”

Candy Udwin, from Camden Keep Our NHS Public, added: “It is truly shocking that at a time of such crisis in the NHS, Camden CCG has given over £2million to private consultancy firms, with a large amount of this going on STP plans which are meant to be finding ways to meet their deficit.”

Most of the companies earning payouts for help with STP have been set up by former public servants, including the former chief executive of NHS London, Dame Ruth Carnall.

Carnall Farrar – which received £115,882 for a STP “review of commissioning arrangements” – was founded by Dame Ruth Carnall and Hannah Farrar, a former director of NHS London, and Ben Richardson, who was a senior partner at McKinsey & Co, after NHS London was disbanded in 2014.

McKinsey & Co, the UK arm of the American management consultancy giant, is one of the big earners from the north London STP – being paid £360,000 from Camden CCG for help on “strategy assessment to investigate further options for the transformation of mental health services” and also “financial modelling of mental health programme initiatives”.

Financial advisers Deloitte netted £257,336 for “support for STP finance and activity modelling” while Methods Advisory was paid £617,850 for “programme management office (PMO) and strategy support”.

The New Journal contacted Methods Advisory for comment on details of the PMO but did not receive a reply.

Hunter Healthcare, which on its website states its values include integrity, tenacity and passion, also received £282,518 for interim administrative support for the PMO. GE Healthcare Finnamore, owned by the US multinational corporation General Electric, was paid £9,900 for more “support with STP finance and activity modelling”.

Health Finance and Economics – a company set up in September 2015 – is so small it is exempted from providing full accounts at Companies House.

It has no website or office, and is run by Jonathan Wise, a former chief finance officer at Brent, Harrow and Hillingdon CCG. It was paid £107,710 for “support for STP finance and activity modelling”.

The New Journal has contacted all of the companies on the list, with only Deloitte and McKinsey responding with short statements saying they could not comment on “client work” and recommending contact with the NHS.

None of the companies involved took up an opportunity to explain how the work of consultancy firms can help the NHS generally.

A spokeswoman for the STP said the large sums listed were partly caused by the new organisation being set up from a “zero base” and that consultants were hired only on an “interim basis” to assist in developing the plan.

“This work was completed by consultants and now a North Central London STP programme management team is in place,” she added. There would now be a “significantly reduced reliance on consultants”.

She added: “Contracts were put in place following a competitive tender using a national consultancy framework.”

Campaigners from Camden are set to join a national Save the NHS demonstration in central London on March 4.”

http://camdennewjournal.com/article/revealed-how-consultancy-firms-have-already-netted-2-million-in-nhs-shake-up

Aside

Posted by

Posted on

16 Feb 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, DCC

“Devon County Council leaders calls for urgent Government review of council funding”

BUT THESE PEOPLE CAMPAIGNED ON A TICKET OF SUPPORTING THIS GOVERNMENT WITH CONTINUING AUSTERITY CUTS! SO WHY ARE THEY (A) SURPRISED AND (B) COMPLAINING?

“THE LEADER of Devon County Council is calling for an urgent national review of local government funding.

Council leader John Hart said the county’s budget had been cut by more than £267 million over the last seven years to meet Government austerity targets.

“This reduction has a very serious effect on the ability of this council to offer services to the people of Devon,” he said.

The future funding of services was uncertain because the Government was further reducing its grants and switching financial support to business rates but there was no clarity or certainty about how much that would generate. … “

http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/devon-county-council-leaders-calls-for-urgent-government-review-of-council-funding/story-30142087-detail/story.html

AND they expect us to vote for them AGAIN in May!

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

14 Feb 2017

Posted under

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

NHS cuts “are more than about bed numbers”

“Call to keep fighting for East Devon’s hospital services

‘Cuts are about more than bed numbers’ – campaigners urge people to form united front

Share article from on facebook Tweet article from Share article from on Google Pluspost article from on reddit email article from send article from on WhatsappSend article from as text message
Campaigners are appealing for people to keep fighting for community hospitals in East Devon as they warn further changes are imminent.

Proposals to cut inpatient bed numbers by 54 per cent across the region – a move that could see Sidmouth Victoria Hospital lose its entire unit – triggered a huge public backlash as thousands turned out and signed petitions to voice their opposition.

The consultation came to a close on January 6, and the fate of community hospital beds is now in the hands of the NEW Devon Clinical Commissioning Group’s (CCG) governing body, which is expected to make a decision next month.

Campaigners are urging the public to mobilise on behalf of East Devon’s hospitals and challenge any further shake-ups as health bosses strive to plug a predicted £384million deficit by 2020/21.

Di Fuller, chair of the Sid Valley’s Patient Participation Group, said: “There is an apparent hiatus in the consultation and proposed changes to hospital services, but the planning and processes required for the Sustainability and Transformation Plans (STPs) continue under the radar.”

She added that many felt they had done what they could, but said with further consultations due, it was vital for people to keep informed and in a position to fight for their health services.

Chris East, a Sidmouth campaigner who set up an East Devon-wide petition and Facebook group, said: “We want to keep people involved and make them aware that there are things they can do.”

CCG bosses say their raft of proposed changes will benefit patients as they aim to move away from a hospital-reliant system of care to a more efficient, home-based model.

Sidmouth councillor and leader of the East Devon Alliance (EDA) Cathy Gardner argues a bigger campaign is needed to oppose Government-imposed cuts – that, she says, are about more than just bed numbers.

She is urging people to join a national mass protest against the ‘rapid dismantling of the NHS’ to be held in London on Saturday, March 4, and said EDA was organising a coach from the region with spaces available at modest cost.

To keep up-to-date with developments regarding the future of community hospitals, visit http://www.facebook.com/groups/1796549897279442/ or to book a coach space, email coach@eastdevonalliance.org.uk”

http://www.exmouthjournal.co.uk/news/call_to_keep_fighting_for_east_devon_s_hospital_services_1_4883590

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

13 Feb 2017

Posted under

Austerity cuts, Public Open Space

Newcastle consults on transfer of parks and allotments to new charitable trust

“Newcastle City Council is to consult on a new funding, management and maintenance model for 33 of the city’s parks and allotments.

The proposal, if implemented, would see Newcastle’s parks and green spaces (comprising more than 400 hectares of land) remain the property of the city council but day-to-day responsibility for funding, managing and maintaining them transferred to a charitable trust.

The council has been awarded £237,500 by the Heritage Lottery Fund (HLF) to test the approach.

This money will be used to: construct a business case and legal structure for the trust to operate the council’s parks and allotments; and if implemented, put the governance in place and deliver training to the new trustees, staff and volunteers.

The HLF has, together with the Big Lottery Fund, already invested more than £12m to restore and upgrade the city’s parks. It has been calling on local and national government, communities and businesses to explore innovative ways to fund and maintain public parks.

Newcastle said the scheme had been designed “to help tackle the financial challenges facing the local authority, where park budgets have been dramatically reduced”.

It pointed out that parks were not a statutory service for local authorities but many recognised their vital importance to the health and well-being of local communities.

The city council is working alongside the National Trust to deliver the project. The authority will also explore whether an endowment could be put in place to support the proposed trust, and is required by the HLF to share its findings about the scheme with other councils.”

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=30024%3Anewcastle-consults-on-transfer-of-parks-and-allotments-to-new-charitable-trust&catid=58&Itemid=26

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

10 Feb 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, EDDC, Knowle/Honiton/Exmouth relocation, Scrutiny

Many councils expect to find themselves technically insolvent soon

Many councils fear that they will become technically insolvent. So what does ours do? Pursues a vanity project relocation from one HQ to an HQ with two satellite offices – one which needs a massive amount of money spent on it because estimates of cost were made before a full survey was done (Exmouth) and one that requires new build (Manstone) – all three when building costs are rising 20-35% coupled with a growing shortage of skilled labour which will push wages up.

Fiddling while Rome burns? Play that fiddle! 🎻

“Some local authorities may be forced to declare technical insolvency in the next two years, experts have said, as councils struggle to weather the financial pressures caused by budget cuts and growing demand for social care.

A survey of councils in England and Wales by the Local Government Information Unit (LGIU) thinktank found that three-quarters had little or no confidence in the sustainability of local government finances and more than one in 10 believed they were in danger of failing to meet legal requirements to deliver core services. …

… “Councils have no faith in the system. They are patching together their finances by putting up council tax, drawing down reserves and increasing charges. Increasingly they worry that they will not be able to provide the vital services that people rely on.”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/feb/10/councils-budget-cuts-social-care-bills

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

10 Feb 2017

Posted under

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

Banana councils, the NHS and social care

“If Surrey’s ‘secret deal’ is to be a harbinger of a new health and care service then the whole murky world of local government funding needs rethinking.

The algebra is simple. The NHS is having another terrible winter. It does not collapse, but “spills demand” on to the next line of defence, local government welfare. But while the NHS gets more money annually from the Treasury, local government gets less, some 30% less since 2011. It cannot cope with the new pressure.

The equation resolves itself into rationing, by quantity and quality: fewer care places, fewer home visits and fewer district nurses leads to more bed-blocking, fewer operations, longer trolley waits.

Tory Surrey is a responsible supplier of post-hospital care. Like all councils, it is allowed by the Treasury to increase its council tax by 5%, specifically to boost its care budget and thus ease pressure on the NHS – which the Treasury is responsible for funding. Surrey county council regarded this as nothing like enough. It therefore activated its statutory right to hold a referendum on a 15% increase.

Far from showing delight at a wealthy council accepting this burden, the Tory government was appalled. Tories do not increase taxes. The chancellor (and Surrey MP) Philip Hammond duly did what Jeremy Corbyn called a secret deal. If Surrey abandoned its referendum and the 15% hike, it could retain revenue from a different tax – the local business rate, which normally went to the Treasury. That is, the Treasury would in effect spend more on health and care in Surrey, but secretly and, so far, just for Surrey.

This is the stuff of a banana republic. If Britain wants to spend more on health and elderly care, it should raise it and spend it honestly. Instead, the Treasury is running around its fiscal A&E department, staunching the flow of political blood by slamming on plasters wherever a patient screams or twists an arm.

Leaked Surrey council tax texts allow Corbyn to ambush May at PMQs
Some might argue that an NHS free at the point of delivery has had its day. New disciplines and incentives, through fees or insurance or more prevention, must constrain marginal demand. But for the time being, it makes no sense to squeeze the NHS at the top – where politicians are exposed – and dump its problems on to local government and different funding streams at the bottom. It wastes money and distorts priorities. It is illiterate public finance.

If Surrey is harbinger of a new health and care service, and business taxes are to relieve an ever-burgeoning NHS, so be it. But few places are as rich as Surrey. Revenue will have to be redistributed from rich to poor areas. In other words, it is not just the NHS that needs rethinking, but the whole murky world of local government finance.”

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/feb/10/surrey-local-council-funding-health-care-nhs

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

10 Feb 2017

Posted under

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

Put a red line round your local hospital on 1 April

“COMMUNITIES across Devon will be putting a red line around each hospital in protest of their own red line to ‘no cuts to any health services anywhere in Devon.

The Success Regime is proposing large cuts to health services in Devon as part of its Sustainability and Transformation Plan (STP).

The STP proposes to cut 590 acute and community beds across Devon, cut nurses’ jobs and access to continuing care, cut acute services in North Devon and cut most of the remaining community hospitals.

Dave Clinch, North Devon media liaison for Save Our Hospitals Services, said: “They really believe when it comes to cuts, “there are no red lines”. They claim to be able to deliver a better health service at the same time as making cuts to the tune of £550 million in Devon alone.

“On April 1 communities across Devon will put a human red line around each and every hospital. This will be a visible statement of our own red line “No cuts to any health services anywhere in Devon.”

The demonstration at North Devon District Hospital will begin at midday on Saturday, April 1.

This comes after proposals of NHS cuts were leaked, which sought to tackle a projected £430 million funding shortfall in the region’s healthcare system by 2019.

In August 2016, more than 200 Barnstaple residents marched from Pilton Park to the district hospital, calling for the safeguarding of services at the hospital.

Those who took part called upon the Success Regime to ensure that acute services, such as A&E, maternity and stroke units, were protected from the cuts.

Speaking at the time, Angela Pedder, chief executive of the Success Regime, said: “We know local people care deeply about the services that Northern Devon Healthcare NHS Trust provides and we thank them for their continued support.

“However, we’ve been very clear that the NHS in Devon is facing both clinical and financial sustainability challenges.

“The challenges faced are set out in our Case for Change document and all health organisations in Northern, Eastern and Western Devon are working together to improve care, provide more integrated and locally tailored services, and tackle the projected £100 million a year overspend.

“The team has been working closely, as part of the Success regime programme, with NHS leaders and GPs, as well as local public and patient representatives, to develop proposals on future options for local health and care services.”

http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/this-is-no-april-fool-communities-across-devon-to-put-red-line-around-local-hospitals/story-30126325-detail/story.html