Public consultation on public consultation closes in school holidays!

Owl says: Perhaps the first rule of public consultation should be: DON’T CLOSE IT DURING A MAJOR HOLIDAY PERIOD!

We all know EDDC’s predilection for putting in major consultations on controversial planning applications over Christmas – but to close a public consultation (on public consultation) in the middle of the major school holiday beggars belief!

“Consultation on how district council approaches community and stakeholder consultation and involvement will close on Wednesday 15 August 2018

East Devon District Council is currently consulting on its new Statement of Community Involvement (SCI). This is a document, which sets out how, where and when the council will consult on planning matters such as Policy documents, planning applications and Neighbourhood Plans. A copy of the SCI can be found on the East Devon website: http://eastdevon.gov.uk/media/2546869/2018-sci-v4.pdf

The SCI sets out East Devon’s approach to promoting community and stakeholder consultation and involvement in respect to:
• How the council produces future planning policy and engages with stakeholders.
• How the council notifies individuals and organisations that planning applications have been submitted and how the local authority encourages developers to undertake consultation.

The SCI is available for comment until Wednesday 15 August 2018. All comments will be considered by the council and will inform subsequent versions of the document.

Any comments should be marked ‘SCI’ and emailed to:

planningpolicy@eastdevon.gov.uk
or posted to

Planning Policy Team, East Devon District Council, Knowle, Sidmouth, EX10 8HL.

Very important case law on consultation

This has great relevance to NHS consultations, the wording of consultation comments, the treatment of those comments and the duties and respinsibility of the DCC Health and Wellbeing Scrutiny Committee to scrutinise evidence presented.

It is going to be much easier to challenge flawed consultations.

Those involved in these matters MUST read the full document (see source at end of post. Only a couple of the relevant sections are published here but should be read with the whole document.

“… “Commentary on
R (ex parte Kohler) v The Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime
[2018] EWHC 1881

This Briefing Note considers the judgment handed down by Lord Justice Lindblom and Mr Justice Lewis on 20th July 2018. It details the circumstances of the case, its wider context and, in particular discusses practical issues which will be of concern to consultation practitioners.

Background

In common with other police forces, the Metropolitan Police has needed to make huge savings in its budget. Unsurprisingly it has led to a review of what premises they occupy and whether they still need over-the-counter services at their police stations.

In July 2017, the Mayor’s Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC) published a Public Access and Engagement Strategy, a dual-purpose document simultaneously consulting the public about the future direction of public engagement on policing and seeking views on proposals to close or ‘swap’ 37 police counters.

The consultation was heavily criticised, and at the Institute, we published a detailed critique under the provocative title Is this the worst consultation of 2017?

https://www.consultationinstitute.org/worst-consultation-2017/

Some of the complaints were heeded and a revised set of questions emerged three weeks after its original launch.

The legal challenge

Professor Paul Kohler lives in Wimbledon and in 2014, was subjected to a serious assault. He believes his life was possibly saved only thanks to the prompt response by police from Wimbledon Police Station.

The MOPAC proposal included a provision for that facility to be transferred elsewhere in the London Borough of Merton – to Mitcham, so that the site at Wimbledon could be sold and generate capital receipts. These in turn, according to the consultation document, would help the Met Police fund technology improvements needed to support the case for changing public access and reduce the traditional reliance on police counters. …

The Kohler case spells an end to the practice of sending decision-makers a summary report (or an unreadable tome) with a message ‘Don’t worry, there’s nothing here to stop you from going ahead!’. If a failure to consider a specific argument can spell illegality following a consultation, someone somewhere has to decide what might constitute such an argument. Who can be trusted to decide?

The Consultation Institute View [on the case]

• The Kohler case is a game-changer, placing the Gunning Four Principle of ‘conscientious consideration ‘ at centre stage. There have been few comparable cases, as flawed consultations have, in the past failed the pre-determination or the sufficient information tests. It remains to be seen if the judgment opens the door to more claims that decision-makers never properly studied consultee submissions. It could happen!

• One consequence is that campaigners and other smart stakeholders will structure their comments to ensure that they cannot easily be summarised, and may specifically seek assurances that their submissions will have been read by decision-makers.

• To respond to such pressures and to safeguard themselves, consultors will need to look again at their data analysis practices, possibly strengthening the independent element both in analysis and in reporting to decision-makers. They will also need to be better at political risk assessments. Independent Quality Assurance becomes even more attractive for controversial consultations.

• The case for Public consultation hearings is further strengthened, as decision-makers will be able to prove that they heard and understood particular arguments. …”

Full document here:

Click to access briefingnote21-mopac.pdf

EDDC’s “Statement of Community Incolvement” analysis by Sidmouth’s Futures Forum

For a comprehensive analysis of its flaws, see here:

http://futuresforumvgs.blogspot.com/2018/07/east-devon-statement-of-community.html

EDDC: consultation on Statement of Community Involvement

“The Council is currently consulting on the new Statement of Community Involvement (SCI). This is the document which sets out how, where and when we will consult on planning matters such as Policy documents, planning applications and Neighbourhood Plans.

The SCI is available for comment from

3rd July to 15th August 2018

All comments will be considered by the Council and will inform subsequent versions of the document.

Any comments should be marked ‘SCI’ and emailed to:

planningpolicy@eastdevon.gov.uk
or posted to
Planning Policy Team, East Devon District Council, Knowle, Sidmouth, EX10 8HL
Phone: 01395 571533

THIS is how you hold a CCG to account!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Claire Wright fights for proper scrutiny and transparency at DCC

Owl says: it beggars belief that (a) councillors are banned from asking public experts any questions and (b) minutes do not reflect PUBLIC anxieties!

And what would we do without INDEPENDENT councillors like Claire Wright!

“A recommendation will be put before Devon County Council Chairs of Scrutiny Committees on relaxing the rules around asking questions of members of the public, following today’s Procedures Committee meeting.

I proposed that there should be flexibility in the rules relating to public speaking in allowing questions from councillors on the committee. This was after I was prevented from asking a local GP a question following his submission relating to concerns on care at home, at January’s Health and Adult Care Scrutiny Committee meeting.

There was some discussion at today’s meeting and it emerged that other scrutiny chairs (Cllr Rob Hannaford in this instance) exercise discretion for points of clarification. I asked that this be made into a formal policy and it was agreed that the issue would be put before the next Chairs of Scrutiny meeting, which I will attend and make my case.

It is difficult to see a reason to argue against this modest change! My proposal to reduce the length of time that members of the public must register, from four days to two days, was not supported, unfortunately.

BETTER RECORDING OF PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS IN MINUTES BACKED

However, my request for more detailed recording in the minutes of members of the public submissions was backed by the committee this morning – after a bit of persuasion! This is important for the sake of balance. I argued that the committee exists to investigate matters of public concern. And it’s also important for the audit trail if the local health service did (heaven forbid) catastrophically fail and the health scrutiny committee was held to account.

Currently, the NHS presentations are recorded in detail, but members of the public representations are so glossed over in the minutes that no one would have a clue what their position was on the subject or what they said. With a simple tweak this will hopefully now be altered, which I believe more fully reflects what we are are here to do as councillors … which is represent members of the public.”

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

“The Case for Public Consultation Hearings”

In its latest Briefing Paper, the Institute argues the case for Public Consultation Hearings. In the recommended format, organisations undertaking a consultation will provide the opportunity for selected consultees to appear before decision-makers and give their evidence and their viewpoint – a little like Parliamentary Select Committees.

It is not a new idea, but there are important reasons why the time is right to consider these forms of dialogue:

People are heartily fed up with perfunctory, tick-in-the box forms of dialogue, especially simplistic online surveys with questions like ‘Do you agree with us that we should revise the regulations …. Blah blah.? ‘ Serious stakeholders want a better level of debate that considers issues properly. Public hearings can help.

We have to tackle what can be described on the week of Stephen Hawkins’ death) as the consultation ‘black hole’ It is where respondents make a submission or reply to a consultation but have no idea what happens to their views. Does anyone read them? Are they considered? If so, by whom. It is as if responses disappear down a black home never to reappear. Public hearings are one way to demonstrate that consultors listen!

All the emphasis is now on digital dialogues, and they have many fine features that encourage participation by large numbers who might not have responded using traditional methods. Public hearings can be a welcome antidote to the de-personalisation of electronic media – where real people can be seen to sit down and discuss evidence. Video-streaming can make this visible and transparent to far wider audiences, and be living proof that consultation is really taking place.

The Briefing Paper looks at the role of evidence in public debate, and the need for participants in consultations to evidence their claims and assertions. It then presents the arguments in favour of public hearings, and explores whether they might work in the context of public consultations. For existing public engagement practitioners, the most valuable section may well be on the practicalities of organising a programme of hearings and the challenges that might need to be overcome.

Our conclusion is that where there is a considerable amount of public interest, or where the subject-matter is deeply controversial, they will help convince sceptical communities that decision-makers care enough to explore the issues openly and in public. There is even a case for holding events like this well before a consultation is launched. A pre-consultation exploration of key issues and an opportunity for stakeholder to spell out what they would like to see considered might be a first-rate way of involving the public. Used in this way, hearings can even form part of a co-production approach.

Make your own mind up by reading the latest ‘Briefing Paper 35’ which you can view here if you are member. Alternatively contact Rebecca Wright to request a copy if you are not a member, or would like Institute Associates to help prepare a programme of Public Consultation Hearings for your own organisation.”

https://www.consultationinstitute.org/tackling-the-black-hole-of-consultation/

DCC Councillor Martin Shaw (East Devon Alliance) updates on NHS changes

This is a long article but if you want to know where we are with NHS changes in Devon this gives you all the information.

Our pressure has led to Devon NHS joining a national retreat from privatising Accountable Care Organisations. However the Devon Integrated Care System will still cap care, with weak democratic control – we need time to rethink

We must thank ALL our Independent Councillors – particularly DCC Independent Councillor Claire Wright, DCC Councillor Martin Shaw (East Devon Alliance) and EDDC Councillor Cathy Gardner (East Devon Alliance) for the tremendous work they have done (and continue to do) in the face of the intransigence (and frankly, unintelligence) of sheep-like Tory councillors.

At EDDC Tory Councillors told their Leader to back retaining community hospitals, so he went to DCC and voted to close them (receiving no censure for this when Independents called for a vote of no confidence).

At the DCC, Health and Social Care Scrutiny Committee Tory members were 10-line whipped by its Chair Sarah Randall-Johnson to refuse a debate on important changes and to vote for accelerated privatisation with no checks or balances.

At DCC full council – well Tory back-benchers might just as well send in one councillor to vote since they all seem to be programmed by the same robotics company!

Consultation by Parliament should be more than asking people for their views then ignoring them

Concluding paragraph of article

“The analysis of the UK Parliament’s attempt to integrate the public’s voice into the legislative process shows, therefore, that while the public’s view may enhance the understanding of the consequences of a bill and therefore enhance its scrutiny, this in itself does not constitute effectiveness. In order to have a greater impact on legislation, its integration needs to be thought through as something more integral to the legislative process rather than simply sitting in parallel with it. Integrating the public’s view directly into representative institutions requires a very careful consideration of their role and of the processes in place to facilitate it and to maximise its effect on scrutiny.”

http://www.democraticaudit.com/2018/02/21/engaging-the-public-with-the-scrutiny-of-legislation-requires-more-than-just-asking-for-their-views/

“Fix the NHS: Protesters rally in London [and Exeter] to call for government action

“Health workers, activists and unions are marching in central London on Saturday to protest against government inaction over the NHS winter crisis.

Hospitals have been overwhelmed in recent weeks by a surge in admissions that has led to delays of up to 12 hours on emergency wards, patients left on trollies for hours and thousands of patients forced to wait in ambulances before receiving urgent care.

Two pressure groups, the People’s Assembly and Health Campaigns Together, have organised the rally to call on the government to plug funding and resource gaps in the health service. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/feb/03/fix-the-nhs-protesters-rally-in-london-to-call-for-government-action

Mid-Devon Scrutiny Committee consults residents on problems

People are happier in Crediton than their neighbouring district towns of Tiverton and Cullompton a survey has found.

Members of Mid Devon District Council’s scrutiny committee went to the three towns between May and August to gather opinion after it was agreed a lack of consultation was a key issue for the public. …”

http://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/people-happier-crediton-thanks-community-1010711

“Shepton Mallet hospital campaigners: “Reopen this hospital or we’ll see you in court”

Any bets on this hospital re-opening!

“A group of campaigners have launched a legal bid to try and prevent the temporary closure of a community hospital in Somerset.

Shepton Mallet Community Hospital Supporters Group have submitted a pre-action protocol letter to the Somerset Partnership Trust in an effort to reverse the temporary closure of the town’s community hospital.

A pre-action protocol letter is sent from one party to another in a dispute to narrow any issues or to see if litigation can be avoided.

Ten in-patient beds were closed temporarily in October due to staffing issues with the trust saying that they hoped to reopen them in March 2018.

Confirmation of the decision to temporarily close the hospital came after an email to staff was leaked on social media, saying that the plans would “proceed”.

This was despite a previous statement which said that it was “considering its next steps”.

The partnership later insisted that “nothing has changed” and that it remains focused on reopening the hospital towards the end of March 2018.

In a statement, a spokesman for the supporters group said that the letter aimed to challenge the alleged “unlawfulness” of the trusts decision and to “achieve the re-opening of the in-patient beds as quickly as possible.”

Paul Turner said: “We have asked the Trust to rescind its decision before a Court quashes it, and if it wants to take any such decision in the future or any other decision on a change in service at SMCH, the Trust must undertake a prior proper public consultation.

“This is nothing new and the point has been made before in meetings with SOMPAR representatives.”

He added: “We are of course also prepared to take part in alternative dispute resolution to avoid going to court.

“We have asked to be kept up to date concerning developments in this dispute.”

Somerset Partnership Chief Executive, Peter Lewis said: “We have received the letter and we are considering our response.

“In the meantime, I want to reassure the Shepton Mallet community that we remain committed to re-opening the community hospital inpatient ward as soon as we can, although we do not expect this to be before the end of March 2018.”

The issue of the temporary closure was raised at a debate in Westminster Hall last month by the MP for Wells, James Heappey.

Mr Heappey said: “The overall nurse rota statistics for both day and night shifts were 100 per cent in Shepton.”

http://www.somersetlive.co.uk/news/somerset-news/shepton-mallet-community-hospital-883030

Cranbrook (Preferred Approach) consultation opens

PRESS RELEASE

“Cranbrook Plan – Preferred Approach

We are delighted to advise that East Devon District Council are consulting on the above plan and we would welcome your comments that need to be received by us by

9:00 am on Monday 8 January 2018.

The Cranbrook Plan Preferred Approach documents set out proposals for the future development of the town and they include a masterplan that shows the proposed location of differing types of buildings and land uses including homes, shops, community facilities and open spaces. In the consultation documents we provide details of evidence and background reports that support the Cranbrook work and we also have a schedule of potential future policies for Cranbrook development and a sustainability appraisal.

The feedback we receive from this consultation will help inform production of a formal development plan document (or DPD) for the town that we hope to produce and consult on in 2018 and then to formally submit for independent examination. You can find out more about the Cranbrook Plan – Preferred Approach, look at supporting documents and find out how to make comments by visiting our web site at:

http://eastdevon.gov.uk/planning/planning-policy/cranbrook-plan/cranbrook-plan-preferred-approach-consultation

and

http://eastdevon.gov.uk/planning/planning-policy/cranbrook-plan/get-involved-share-your-views

Do please contact us if you have any queries or would like further information. We would advise that we are contacting you because your details are logged on our planning policy database or you have previously responded to Cranbrook consultation events. If, however, you no longer wish to be contacted by this Council in respect of planning policy documents do please advise us and we will remove your details from our database.”

Yours faithfully
The Cranbrook Team
East Devon District Council

“How a city is tackling poverty by giving a voice to its poorest citizens”

Can’t see this catching on in East Devon, more’s the pity!

“It’s time to change politics,” says the Mayor of Salford, at a packed meeting of the Truth ­Poverty Commission in his home city. “Either politics is done to us, or we shape it.”

Since being elected a year ago, Mayor Paul Dennett has been radically reshaping the way things are done in Salford.

Last month he gave care workers a 10.7% pay rise. His town hall has given the go-ahead for seven new library sites at a time when many councils are closing them.

As other parts of the UK face ­maternity unit closures, the council has stepped in to ‘Keep Babies Born in Salford’ by opening a new midwife-led unit where 300 babies may now be delivered each year.

Salford has also invested £2million into a development company – in order to kickstart building of social housing that won’t fall under the government’s new Right To Buy policy. The company is called Derive – named after a joke involving ­revolutionary Italian situationists.

All of which looks like a blueprint for a Labour government, or what unashamedly interventionist Dennett calls “sensible socialism”.

The 36-year-old mayor is passionate about using his £200million budget to end poverty , partly because he has never forgotten what it feels like to come up the hard way, through a childhood he describes as at times “horrific” and something “I wouldn’t wish on anyone”.

Scarred by domestic abuse and his younger brother’s fight against leukaemia, he failed his GCSEs and A-levels and by 18 was working in a “sweat shop” call centre.

“I had an interesting journey,” he says wryly, at his offices in Swinton. “I grew up in a family where there was traumatic violence and abuse. My dad became an alcoholic and I struggled at school in my early teens.”

A power station fitter by trade, Paul’s dad went on to manage The Engine pub in Liverpool’s Prescot area, where his alcoholism began. Paul’s mum, a cleaner, ran the pub as her marriage disintegrated.

Later in life, Paul won a place to study International Business at the University of Ulster, where he achieved a first-class honours degree. He went on to Manchester ­Business school before doing a PhD at Manchester Met, working as a civil servant and then for a utilities company.

Now living in Salford – where he became a tenants’ leader and then a local councillor – as council leader he sees the Truth Poverty Commission as part of a new way of doing politics, with people’s consent.

Based on a model that has been used in Glasgow and Leeds, the Commissioners include people with experience of poverty.

“Consultation usually means organisations telling you about their plans,” says community worker Jayne Gosnall, 54, who is recovering from alcohol addiction. “This is about really listening to people with experience.”

The Commission is independent but supported by Salford City Council, the Mayor and the Bishop of Salford, and facilitated by Church Action on Poverty and Community Pride. It has led to the council bringing in a raft of measures that will transform lives – from waiving birth certificate fees for homeless people to changing the way the council chases debt.

Debbie Brown, transformation director at Salford City Council, says: “We come into these meetings and we hug each other – that’s not what normally happens in council meetings,” she says. “But the other thing that stopped me in my tracks was the City Council being identified as a cause of poverty.

“We heard stories about what it was like for people hiding from council tax collection agents, people being afraid, and that’s not a city I recognise.

“We’re changing a lot already. We’re going back to the personal, identifying people who are struggling to pay and looking again at what we can do.

“We won’t be using bailiffs for those in receipt of council tax reduction and young care leavers are exempt.”

Laura Kendall, 33, a mum of two and a youth worker, suffered undiagnosed mental health problems as a teenager and was placed in care.

“Sharing my story for this project was difficult but very powerful for me,” she says. “I want people to know their voices will be heard, that a child growing up in the care system can have a better chance.

“I’d spent my whole life trying to get people to listen to me and got used to being rejected. This area has been written off so many times but it’s full of people with something to add.”

Salford’s mayor is determined to listen. “This is about working-class communities coming together and a spirit of solidarity,” Dennett says. “It’s the spirit of Salford in action.”

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/how-city-tackling-poverty-giving-11457050

Poorer Devon council refuses to merge with richer council which agreed to own council tax rise to take it over!

Definitely Devon!

Poorer West Devon District Council agreed to talks with richer South Hams District Council. A consultation showed that a majority of people in both districts were against the move, which would have seen the South Ham council tax rise to match that of (more sparsely populated) West Devon. Both councils have large Conservative majorities.

South Hams District Council agreed last night to merge with its poorer neighbour. But, in a surprise move, again last night, West Devon voted not to merge!

It appears councillors in West Devon feared a loss of autonomy (and their jobs?) and felt that other avenues for making up a £1 milion plus shortfall had not been sufficiently examined.

Owl feels there is a very complex political back story here!

“Plans for two Devon district councils to merge are off.

South Hams and West Devon councils already share some services but proposed a full merger, saying it would mean £500,000 in savings annually.

Last night, members of South Hams authority voted in favour of the proposals, despite the fact it would have meant higher council tax bills for its residents – a £25 increase a year for three years.

But, in a surprising twist, West Devon councillors voted against, even though it’s the poorer authority.

It leaves it needing to find another way to plug a £1m projected black hole in its finances.”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-england-devon-41748437

“Axe Valley health hub plan launched as campaigners fight hospital sell off”

“Campaigners will continue to fight plans to sell off Seaton Hospital and to support plans for a new health hub for the Axe Valley. …

[Independent East Devon Alliance] County councillor Martin Shaw [Seaton and Colyton] said: “Forty campaigners from the Axe Valley area met in Seaton this week to review the state of the campaign for the local hospitals.

“I told the meeting that while the battle to save Seaton’s hospital beds had been lost, it had put Seaton on the map in the forthcoming discussions about health services in the area.”

Mayor of Seaton, Cllr Jack Rowland, said that a meeting to set up a steering committee for an Axe Valley Health Hub would take place shortly.

He was encouraged that the Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital Trust was putting resources into this and he also pointed out that more than fifty services involving over a hundred staff were still based at the hospital.

Campaigners will continue to fight plans to sell off Seaton Hospital and to support plans for a new health hub for the Axe Valley.

In August, a vigil was held outside Seaton Hospital as the beds inside the hospital were closed, as protesters waved banners, shouted “shame”, and expressed their anger and sadness outside Seaton Hospital as the controversial closures of community hospitals began.

Plans to remove the beds from Exeter, Seaton, Honiton and Okehampton community hospitals have been met with strong opposition since they were confirmed in March.

The North, East and West (NEW) Devon Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) said the move will see more people being given care at home and save £2.6million.

Although the battle to save the hospital beds has been lost, a new campaign though has been set up in the Axe Valley area to support the development of a health hub in the region.

County councillor Martin Shaw said: “Forty campaigners from the Axe Valley area met in Seaton this week to review the state of the campaign for the local hospitals.

“I told the meeting that while the battle to save Seaton’s hospital beds had been lost, it had put Seaton on the map in the forthcoming discussions about health services in the area.”

He was encouraged that the Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital Trust was putting resources into this and he also pointed out that more than fifty services involving over a hundred staff were still based at the hospital. ‘Don’t let anyone say the hospital is closed’, he said.

The meeting, chaired by Paul Arnott of the East Devon Alliance, agreed that it was necessary to establish which health services could most usefully be based in Seaton and Axminster hospitals, and this might involve canvassing the views of local residents and a number of people present offered to help with this.

The meeting decided to set up a new Axe Valley Hospitals Campaign to support the development of a health hub around the two hospitals and to oppose any proposals to sell off hospital sites.”

http://www.devonlive.com/news/health/axe-valley-health-hub-plan-699423

Is a new, powerful supra-regional authority being created without public consultation?

Owl says: yes!

On 1 January 2018, a new “Joint Committee” will come into being.

It is charged with delivery of a “productivity strategy” for the whole Devon and Somerset area.

For its (sinister?) aims and objectives, see section 1.3 here:

Click to access 011117bpcabinethotsw%20jcarrangementsappendixc.pdf

Truly, we live in disturbing times as NONE of this has had ANY public consultation, yet, at EDDC, it will be decided on the nod at its Cabinet meeting on 1 November 2017:

Click to access 011117combinedcabinetagenda.pdf

Some really worrying points:

In Section 2.2 it says that the joint committee can at any time extend its powers as it sees fit.

Section 9.2 says a simple majority of votes will decide actions [the membership will be overwhelmingly Tory]

Section 12.0 Chief Executives and Monitoring Officers will be able to add items to the agenda.

NO DOCUMENT PUT FORWARD HAS ANY MENTION OF SCRUTINY OR TRANSPARENCY

The new “joint authority” authority consists of:

[MEMBERS]

Dartmoor National Park Authority
Devon County Council
East Devon District Council
Exeter City Council
Exmoor National Park Authority
Mendip District Council
Mid Devon District Council
North Devon Council
Plymouth City Council
Sedgemoor District Council
Somerset County Council
South Hams District Council
South Somerset Council
Torbay Council
Taunton Deane Borough Council
Teignbridge District Council
Torridge District Council
West Devon Borough Council
West Somerset Council

PLUS CO-OPTED NON-VOTING MEMBERS:

Heart of the South West Local Enterprise Partnership
NHS Northern, Eastern and Western Devon Clinical Commissioning Group
NHS South Devon and Torbay Clinical Commissioning Group
NHS Somerset Clinical Commissioning Group

AND ANY OTHER CO-OPTED MEMBERS THAT THE JOINT COMMISSIONING GROUP DECIDES TO INVITE

Northern Ireland: “Planned cuts to health service could face legal challenge”

In England no unions seem to be doing this. In Devon our Tory councillors would not even refer cuts to the Secretary of State (as they have a legal right to do) in case it upset him but no union has responded.

Where is the anger that seems to be more prevalent in Northern Ireland, whose coffers have recently been boosted by the promise of £1 billion from the English Tory party (paid for by us) to keep them in power, some of which will no doubt go to health services?

“Plans to cut millions of pounds from health services in Northern Ireland could face a legal challenge from trade unionists.

Extra money has been found from within the wider public sector to limit cuts to front line services which once threatened to reduce the number of hospital beds and delay operations. But a union representing thousands of healthcare workers urged trusts responsible for implementing the savings to challenge the Department of Health. Unison said: “If you do not do so, we will challenge you using all legal means at our disposal, a process that has already begun through the complaint Unison has submitted to the trust for the major breaches of your equality duties.”

Senior representatives of the union attended public meetings of trust boards across Northern Ireland on Friday. They told board members: “You are meant to act as guardians of the health service as members of this Trust Board.
“Today, we are repeating our call to you to stand with us to challenge the lack of funding for proper health and social services in Northern Ireland.
“You have seen over the past six weeks that we are prepared to fight for it, and the public is prepared to fight for it. “It is time that this Board, both executive and non-executive alike, demonstrated that you too are prepared to fight for the public you are appointed to serve.”

Trust boards are tasked with drawing up detailed plans for achieving any savings proposed by the Department. The Department has said extra funding announced recently will reduce the projected £70 million savings needed by the end of the financial year. Of the proposed £31 million adjustment affecting front line services only £3 million will now be required, the Department has said in a letter to health trusts. The rest will be found from less visible or back office services, termed “low impact” by the department, which do not affect the public as directly.

But unions have expressed deep unease about the plan. A statement from the Department said it noted Unison’s comments but the position remained as set out in the letter to trusts.

The South Eastern Health Trust agreed to go ahead with low or no impact proposals in its savings plan. It said the additional money had allowed the board to “step away” from major or controversial proposals in the plan.
“However, the meeting heard that while this additional funding will offset some of the current budgetary pressures, the underlying financial challenge has not gone away. “The savings agreed today are mostly non-recurrent so the Trust will be faced with finding significant savings in the years to come, whilst demand for services increases as people live longer and chronic conditions increase.”

Chief executive Hugh McCaughey said it was absolutely essential that we move forward with the transformation of our health and social care system.
“We must use the months ahead to discuss publicly how we better use the significant levels of funding already available for health and social care, and develop a model of healthcare which is sustainable and affordable.”

Controversial proposals which will not now go ahead included a £2 million reduction in locum doctor and agency staff spending. Those given the green light include:

Slowing the transfer of services to the new ward block in the Ulster Hospital;

Replacing agency and locum with in-house staff;

Savings in administrative and management areas like staff travel

Introduction of car parking charges at Ards Hospital”

http://www.irishnews.com/news/healthcarenews/2017/10/13/news/planned-cuts-to-health-service-could-face-legal-challenge-1162005/

Want to comment on LEP’s business plan for us? Go to Torbay council website says Sidmouth Herald!

Sidmouth Herald (as part of Archant a BIG supporter of our LEP) prints a press release on the Sidmouth Herald website on “consultation” on the LEP’s new, improved, answer to all our prayers business plan, citing the enthusiastic words of Paul Diviani, the Deputy Chair of an un-named committee.

Unfortunately, according to the press release, the consultation document appears to be only on Torbay’s website! No link to an EDDC website or the LEP’s own website!

Sloppy.

Perhaps the first consultation comment might be: put your own house in order before you attempt to put a nuclear cell in those of other people!

Here is the press release, in full, in all its glory, where 20 or so business and council members, many with nuclear interests or nuclear-industry-supporting industries attempt to persuade the rest of us that most of their (ie our) money going to Hinkley C is a good thing:

County and district councils in the two counties, along with the Heart of the South West Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP), Dartmoor and Exmoor national park authorities, and NHS commissioning groups from Northern, Eastern and Western Devon, South Devon and Torbay, and Somerset, have worked together to come up with a draft productivity strategy for the area, referred to as the Heart of the South West.

This has now been put out for a consultation, which will run until November 30.

The partnership is said to be seeking the views of businesses, organisations, groups and individuals.

It says its ambition is to double the size of the area’s economy to £70 billion by 2036 and is seeking the right interventions and Government backing to achieve this.

The partnership says the area has ‘unprecedented opportunities’ in sectors including nuclear, marine, rural productivity, health and care, aerospace and advanced engineering, and data analytics.

Councillor Paul Diviani, deputy chair of the prospective joint committee of the leaders of the Heart of the South West, said: “The Heart of the South West economy is larger than that of Birmingham, so we need to be recognised for our true potential as a cohesive economic area.

“Our vision is for all parts of the Heart of the South West to become more prosperous, enabling people to have a better quality of life and higher living standards.

“To achieve that, we have to create a more vibrant and competitive economy where the benefits can be shared by everyone, and by working in partnership we can present a stronger proposition.

“We urge our stakeholders in business and the wider community to give us their views and help us create an effective strategy for delivery.”

The results from the consultation will be considered by the joint committee of the leaders of the Heart of the South West and the Heart of the South West LEP board, before a final productivity strategy is agreed early in 2018.

The consultation documents are available to view on Torbay Council’s website at

http://www.torbay.gov.uk/devolution.

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/south-west-business-plan-up-for-consultation-1-5242862

Independent East Devon Alliance councillors spearhead rethink on Port Royal development

“Cllr Cathy Gardner, who jointly led the ‘Three Rs’ campaign to retain, refurbish and re-use existing buildings at Port Royal, said: “I’m delighted that the reference group has reacted to the views of residents and the consultant will reconsider their recommendations.

“The redevelopment of this area of town is important to all of us and a chance to do something wonderful for the town.

“The Three Rs campaign group will be working to encourage a community-based solution that makes the most of the heritage of the area without over-commercialisation.”

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/report-on-renewal-of-port-royal-unlikely-before-next-year-1-5238392