East Devon District Council: will the Tory bodies ever be exhumed?

One of the reasons so many Independent councillors were elected was because they were not Tories! People had become sick of the way the district had been run for the last 45 years and demanded change. Part of that change was to see exactly what Tories had been up to in those 45 years when transparency was in short supply.

So, on 3 May, we were presented with:

31 Independents (20 mostly eastern-based/central-based Independents, 11 mostly western-based Independent East Devon Alliance)
19 Tories
8 Lib Dems
2 Greens

An alliance of Independents, Lib Dems and Greens would have produced 41 non-Tories – easily outnumbering 19 Tories.

What we now know happened is that eastern-based Independents (Leader Ben Ingham, Exmouth) refused to work with East Devon Alliance. We assume that Lib Dems (who agreed to work with an Independent majority, but not form a coalition with them), were similarly excluded by Mr Ingham from working with his group.

Instead, Mr Ingham chose to work with the 19 Tories, an ex-Tory (former Tory Leader Ian Thomas) and several so-called Independent councillors whose late-onset Independent roots had never been obvious or put to the test. He gave the job of Chairman of the Council to Stuart Hughes, a Cabinet post to Ian Thomas, one of the jobs representing EDDC at Greater Exeter Strategic Plan meetings to Tory Philip Skinner and several other posts to other Tory councillors. Owl has no idea what the two Green (Exmouth-based) councillors think of this arrangement.

Despite this, CEO Mark Williams presumably decided that there were NOT 31 Independents, but two kinds of totally different Independents (Independent Group, EDA) and declared Tories as the “official opposition” – in spite of them holding Cabinet and other posts. Is this constitutionally correct? How does one decide? One asks the CEO – dead end there, then!

This has led to a Tory (“official opposition”) Alan Dent, being the head of the Scrutiny Committee – the only committee that now has wide investigative powers. The Chair of this committee can say Yes or No to requests for scrutiny of any subject – his word is the only word on what goes on an agenda (as long as the CEO agrees, of course).

So, is there any chance of the Scrutiny Committee holding the previous Tory administration to account? No, zero, zilch, nada in Owl’s view.

So those Tory bodies – lying quietly tucked away for the last 45 years are almost certain to continue enjoying their slumbers.

And all because some Independents can’t or won’t work with other Independents and local Lib Dems are keeping themselves well apart where, in other areas, coalitions of Independents, Greens and Lib Dems is promising real change in formerly true-blue districts.

What is so ironic about this whole story is that, in his political career, Ben Ingham has been a Tory councillor, an Independent Councillor and Leader of the East Devon Alliance!!!

Pitiful and shameful.

REAL independence in politics – when ALL independents are in one group

“… As with all the independents I meet, they insist that orthodox party divides have no relevance to politics at the most local level. “If you look at our 16 candidates, we have got leftwing people and we have got a supporter of the Brexit party,” says another DIG councillor, Ged Yardy. “We have not been elected on the basis of our previous politics. Party politics is not in the room.”.

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2019/jun/12/how-to-take-over-your-town-the-inside-story-of-a-local-revolution?

BUT party politics IS in the room when, as in East Devon, Independents from one group appoint Conservatives into positions of power and/or influence in order to give that pairing a majority rather than appointing other independents whose origins differed from theirs.

Swire’s choice for PM: EU says he is a liar, others weigh in with further criticism

One has to wonder (or at least Owl does) why Swire picked on Raab as his choice for Prime Minister. Raab has said that he is willing to override and suspend Parliament (our “sovereignty”) to get what he wants, is “probably” not a feminist as he thinks men get the rawest deal, has been accused of having zero emotional intelligence, has been branded a “dictator” by other rivals for the job, didn’t realise how important Dover was as a port – and many believe that a current aide (a woman who used to work for Michael Gove) was the person who leaked the Gove cocaine story:

Dominic Raab aide in the frame for ‘cocaine leak’

He has also been accused of being a bully by a member of staff, who had to sign a non-disclosure agreement to settle the claim :

https://www.greenocktelegraph.co.uk/news/national-news/17697621.allegations-which-led-to-dominic-raab-signing-nda-brought-vexatiously/

Ah, on further thought, Owl can see exactly why Swire would back him!

“… Dominic Raab, is held in low-esteem in Brussels. During his four-month tenure as Brexit secretary, he lost trust of his EU counterparts. “He was seen to be working against his prime minister and making things up,” the first EU source said.

The European commission recently accused Raab of making “fraudulent” claims and spreading “pure disinformation” in a campaign video about the views of its secretary-general, Selmayr, on the future of Ireland.

Responding to unfavourable reports from Brussels, Raab told the BBC’s The Andrew Marr Show that it “probably tells you that I was doing my job in terms of pressing them hard and making sure that Britain’s interests were resolutely defended” ….”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/11/eu-view-of-tory-leadership-candidates-deeply-critical-say-sources?

The trough …

“BORIS JOHNSON earns £23,000 a month for just ten hours of work writing a weekly newspaper column, which he often uses to attack Theresa May and her Brexit plans.”

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1026570/boris-johnson-salary-how-much-does-he-earn-a-year-since-quit-cabinet

‘Boris Johnson promises tax cut for 3m higher earners’

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/jun/10/boris-johnson-promise-tax-cut-raise-40p-threshold

Electoral Reform: time for big changes

Some interesting articles:

Punch and Judy politics:

Ending the Punch and Judy show: How to get a more cooperative politics

Make Parliament grow up:

Ending the Politics of Division – How We Can Build a New Democracy after Brexit

Ensure fairness for female politicians:

Euro elections show how Westminster’s first past the post holds back women

“Revealed: one in five peers advise private business while serving in parliament”

Owl says: only 1 in 5!

“One in five members of the House of Lords are working as consultants or advisers to private businesses at the same time as serving in parliament, the Guardian can reveal.

An analysis of the Register of Lords’ Interests shows 169 peers reported working as advisers earlier this year, with more than a dozen registering that they were also paid by foreign governments on top of the expenses they are entitled to as peers.

The consultancies range from a former Conservative MP advising the company of a Romanian businessman facing extradition, through to a former chief of defence staff who advises the government of Bahrain.

The worlds of finance, energy, mining and defence are extensively represented among peers’ clients. Unlike MPs, peers are considered part-time public servants, which allows them to pursue other business. Peers are permitted to work as advisers for private interests, as long as they are properly declared.

The findings include:

A leading Labour peer, Lord Levy, has apologised after admitting failing to register three private interests connecting him to a billionaire Russian businessman.

Fifteen peers are working for or advising foreign governments, including a former coalition government cabinet minister and a former chief of defence staff.

Thirty-eight peers indicated they provide public affairs or strategic advice, an area of particular sensitivity because such work can easily stray into lobbying.

Eighty-three peers have declared an interest in finance or banking, with HSBC, Santander and Royal Bank of Scotland among those to have provided paid roles as directors or paid advisers to peers.

Twenty-seven have declared an interest in energy firms, with the same number reporting an interest in companies working in the defence or security sectors.
…”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/may/31/revealed-one-in-five-peers-advise-private-business-while-serving-in-parliament?

“Peer who never spoke in Lords last year claims £50,000 expenses””

“A Labour peer claimed almost £50,000 in attendance and travel expenses covering every single day the House of Lords was sitting last year, despite never speaking or asking any written questions, a Guardian investigation reveals.

The former trade union general secretary David Brookman was among dozens of other lords and baronesses who never took part in a single debate, while almost a third of the 800 peers barely participated in parliamentary business over a 12-month period despite costing almost £3.2m in allowances.

The details have emerged from a new analysis of public data that will raise fresh questions about the size and effectiveness of the Lords, and the funds that can be claimed by those who fail to regularly contribute.

The findings show:

Eighty-eight peers – about one in nine – never spoke, held a government post or participated in a committee at all.

Forty-six peers did not register a single vote, including on Brexit, sit on a committee or hold a post. One peer claimed £25,000 without voting, while another claimed £41,000 but only voted once.

More than 270 peers claimed more than £40,000 in allowances, with two claiming more than £70,000.

The former Lords speaker Frances D’Souza, a long-term advocate of reform, said the findings corroborated “what everyone suspects is going on”, and that a minority of peers risked discrediting the hard work of their colleagues.

“There’s clearly a need to reduce numbers,” Lady D’Souza said, adding that the research “clearly shows there are people who are attending the House of Lords who are not contributing, and therefore they are simply redundant”.

The Guardian’s analysis covers the attendance, participation and allowances claims of 785 lords serving for a full year between 2017 and 2018. They comprise 244 Conservatives, 196 Labour and 97 Liberal Democrats, as well as 248 crossbench peers and various others.”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/may/30/labour-peer-never-spoke-house-of-lords-claims-50000-expenses?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

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

Tories draft law to protect MPs if parties overspend

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

MPs claiming expenses for adult children

“The Daily Telegraph says it has discovered that MPs – including Energy minister Claire Perry – are boosting their expenses by claiming for adult children dependent on them.

According to the paper, the age limit when claiming for children is 18, rising to 21 for certain exceptions.

Ms Perry says all her claims are made in accordance with the rules; two other MPs have told the Telegraph they will return money.

The paper’s leader column says the rules may have changed in the wake of the expenses scandal 10 years ago – but it is clearly going to take a long time to remake the culture in Westminster.

It concludes by advising politicians to listen to the words of Lord Tebbit – “If you wouldn’t be happy to read something about yourself on the front pages, don’t do it.”

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-the-papers-48235813

Has our Electoral Officer messed up again?

EDW comment:

I’d like to thank Mark Williams but I cannot. As we will be away for the European elections we applied for a postal vote. We had a letter on Tuesday from MW graciously allowing us our democratic right and saying that voting papers will follow.. Today’s post was the last opportunity but no voting papers have arrived. Thus we have been deprived of our vote. It seems that in his case past performance is a guide to the future! I wonder who will blame this time?”

Local Tories did NOT lose control of EDDC because of Brexit!

How does Owl know this?

Because the 31 Independents elected on Thursday did not mention Brexit at all when appealing to voters to vote for them!

VERY easy to blame national politics for local losses … no – you lost because you put your party (and your party’s donors) before your district.

Never mind, you have 4 years to work out what to do next time!

Claire Wright explains why she believes people should not vote Conservative in tomorrow’s local election

” … As a former East Devon District Councillor who stood down in 2015, I left because I could not bear the continued nastiness of the ruling group anymore. It was a hard, challenging and ultimately game-changing time, where I exposed underhand practices, culminating in a police investigation, worked tirelessly on planning issues and did my best to make the council more transparent.

Things changed massively on EDDC as a result of my time there and I’m glad I did it, but I view it as a period of my life where I was battling the forces of darkness. That may sound melodramatic but I can tell you that is how it felt. Fortunately, I had massive support from members of the public during that time, who came to meetings, spoke at them and generally provided me with amazing support.

To think that this group might now be on the verge of falling and allowing a new progressive, representative group to take its place makes me very happy indeed. …

Polling day tomorrow. Please go out there and vote!”

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

“Why I’ve joined a new group of MPs trying to fix Britain’s futile adversarial politics”

Could you see Swire or Parish doing this for the sake of our district and our country? No. Could you see Claire Wright doing this? Yes.

“… A few weeks ago I was asked if I would be interested in joining the More United Network. One call with its leadership team and I was sold. The idea is simple really, a new platform for MPs who are willing, where possible, to work cross-party in the national interest, regardless of which party is in power.

I know it’s a cliche, but becoming a dad completely changed how I viewed the world. My outlook was different, less selfish and short termist. I began thinking more about the sort of country I wanted my kids to grow up in. And I could either be the guy who sits round the dinner table or down the pub putting the world to rights, or I could get out there and fight for the things I believe in. So that’s what I did, and two years later I was elected to parliament.

Most MPs enter politics for reasons like this, having been inspired by something or someone in their lives to make a positive difference. And going to work surrounded by a group of people with an immense breadth and depth of knowledge and experience means there’s always something to learn, and areas where common cause can be found.

What many people don’t know is that some of the best work in parliament happens in the All Party Parliamentary Groups (APPGs), where MPs with a shared interest join forces to push for change. Sadly, this sort of positive cross-party cooperation doesn’t often make the headlines.

On the whole, MPs tend to agree on the destination we want to arrive at. We all want to make sure our NHS is at its best, that we’re giving our kids the best start in life and an excellent education so they can fulfil their potential, that people can achieve the dream of home ownership, that our high streets thrive, our environment is protected, and that we have the right transport and digital infrastructure in place.

What is true is that we don’t always agree on the path to get there. That is no bad thing either, we need a battle of ideas, and no side has a monopoly on good ones.

This is what the More United MP Network hopes to achieve; bringing people together in a space that allows consensual politics to flourish so we can find solutions. Seeking out differences and grievances just for the sake of it doesn’t help anyone.

Outside the Westminster circus, real life and real issues are affecting my constituents. Too many feel the deck is stacked against them. It is that pervasive sense of unfairness that threatens social cohesion, and has seen people lurching to populists on the left and right in search of scapegoats and easy answers.

It’s the job of serious MPs to tell it straight – that there is no silver bullet or magical solution to all the issues facing us as a nation. That whilst of course at times our political differences will be too big to bridge, where we can work together to make your lives better, we should.

And when it comes to those of us in the More United Network, we will.”

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-mps-more-united-network-parliament-commons-a8883656.html

English ‘democracy deserts’ would be eradicated with proportional representation

“England is facing “democracy deserts” in next week’s local elections with 148 seats going totally uncontested, according to the Electoral Reform Society.

The seats in the elections on Thursday next week where only one person is standing are spread across 47 councils in the country, the pressure group’s research said.

Of these the Conservatives will gain 137, Liberal Democrats will get five, four will go to independent candidates and Labour will get two.

The society also highlighted parties or independent candidates have also been guaranteed an additional 152 seats through multi-member wards going ‘under contested’ – where a lack of competition means that at least one seat in the ward is guaranteed for a particular party.

There are around 580,000 potential voters in these types of wards, and a further 270,000 voters who are in areas that will see no electoral challenge at all.

About 850,000 voters will be affected by the 300 uncontested or under contested seats, the group added.

The East Midlands has the highest number of uncontested seats, followed by the East of England, West Midlands and the South East, the research said.

Darren Hughes, chief executive of the ERS, said: “Elections are a cornerstone of our democracy. Yet around 270,000 are being denied the chance to exercise their most basic democratic right and have their say on who represents them. Clearly something is not right, with voters going totally unheard.

“Large parts of England are at risk of becoming ‘democracy deserts’, with seats going uncontested and residents having no say who represents them.”

Hughes noted Scotland has almost entirely eradicated “the scourge of uncontested seats” since introducing proportional voting in 2007.

This method, where voters rank their preferred representatives as opposed to selecting one candidate, could bring an end to what the ERS calls “rotten boroughs”.

“It’s time we brought the era of rotten boroughs to a close, by scrapping the broken first-past-the-post system in England and ensuring there is always real competition. A more proportional system would end the crisis of local ‘one party states’ and open up our politics at last,” he added. “

https://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2019/04/voters-denied-democracy-uncontested-local-election-seats

“50 MPs From Seven Parties Join Forces On ‘Issues Ignored Because Of Brexit’ “

“More than 50 MPs have launched a cross-party movement to work together on “issues ignored because of Brexit”.

The ‘More United’ group, dubbed ‘politics for the Netflix generation’, features politicians from seven different political parties, including Labour, Tory, SNP, Lib Dem, Green, ChangeUK and Plaid Cymru.

The new network, which includes leading MPs David Lammy, Nicky Morgan and Caroline Lucas, will help fund candidates who campaign on poverty and homelessness, responsible technology, mental health and urgent climate dangers.

Backed by 150,000 members, it has already helped MPs from different parties to work together on issues like immigration visas, restoring the ‘Enable Fund’ for deaf and disabled people and access to Legal Aid.

MPs who lead and support More United campaigns will be eligible to receive money and volunteers from the movement at general elections, with almost £500,000 raised via crowdfunding and 54 candidates supported in 2017.

The group is not and never will be a political party and as result offers a ‘safe space’ for MPs from opposing parties to join forces on areas of common interest.

Lammy said: “A rare silver-lining to come out of the disastrous Brexit process is a new willingness among MPs to cooperate beyond traditional tribal loyalties.

“MPs have found that there is a special power in cross-party working and by publicly committing to seek out strong alliances that protect shared values we can help create positive changes that benefit the entire country.”

Morgan added: “All MPs come in to politics because they want to improve the lives of the people they represent. Of course we don’t always agree on how to do that but where we can find agreement across party lines there is often a compelling case to be made to the government of the day. The More United Network will give MPs across the Commons a chance to do just that.”

In a HuffPost UK blog, Morgan and Labour’s Tulip Siddiq and Lib Dem Christine Jardine said: “Each of us is strongly committed to our own party. We have plenty of healthy disagreement on all sorts of topics. Yet when it comes to issues that outlive any one Government we think cross-party working is vital.”

More United CEO Bess Mayhew said that the public see cross-party working as a proxy for trust in politics.

“When polling shows that only three out of ten people believe they can make a difference by getting involved in politics something has to change,” she said.

HuffPost UK understands there is no whip, but MU will refuse to direct election resources to MPs who openly oppose their campaigns and vote against in tight votes.

The group aims to have 100 MPs on board by the end of 2020.”

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/50-mps-from-seven-parties-join-forces-on-issues-ignored-because-of-brexit_uk_5cbf829ee4b0764d31d990bb

“Beware far-right candidates posing as ‘independents’ in local elections” [or even as Tories] …

This is in Yorkshire but may easily have East Devon parallels. And in East Devon, you also have to cope with Tories calling themselves Independent too!

Check credentials – REAL Independents will have a good track record of community action over a long period – not just since the last election!

https://tompride.wordpress.com/2019/04/20/beware-far-right-candidates-posing-as-independents-in-local-elections/

The Hermione Grainger of local politics – able to be in two places at the same time!

Phil Twiss (who is NOT the East Devon Tories Whip but is a Tory agent has sent this to Owl.

Just one thing Phil – if she’s been so busy in the Axe Valley, how has she managed to do so much in West Sussex! On parish and district council there and many committees.

Do we have a Hermione Grainger here – able to be in two places at once?

“Well done Owl; you have excelled yourself in getting at least half of the story correct.

I am happy to confirm that Jacquie Russell, a Conservative candidate in the forthcoming East Devon District Council elections on the 2nd of May (with fellow Conservative Marcus Hartnell) has lived in East Devon since 2017, where she is a Governor of the Axe Valley Academy, attended by one of her children. Admittedly not a born and bred local, but in that respect no different to EDA candidates including former Labour Party PPC Martin Shaw, Paul Arnott, Paul Hayward, Cathy Gardner etc………………………………..

More details are of course available on her Election leaflets that is going to all electors in the Seaton ward.

Promoted by Phillip Twiss on behalf of Jacquie Russell both of PO Box 57, Colyton, Devon, EX12 9AP”

And yet another Tory councillor from far, far away (170 miles) it seems – this time Seaton?

NOTE: if this is NOT the same person, Owl is very happy to be contacted by either or both of the people with this name to clear up the matter (eastdevonwatch@gmail.com) as quickly as possible.

This time a sitting councillor in West Sussex – Mrs Jacquie Russell. On her nomination paper for Seaton she gives her address as “East Devon District”:

Click to access seaton.pdf

She appears to be an East Grinstead Town Councillor:

Councillors

“Jacquie sits on the Public Services Committee at present and is also a West Sussex County Council for East Grinstead South and Ashurst Wood.”

Councillors

though apparently not standing for re-election this year:

and she sits on her local district council too:

“Jacquie Russell is a former Co-Director of a Construction Project management company and is now a Property Developer. Previously she has been Leader of East Grinstead Town Council and Chairmen of its Planning Committee. She is a mother of five, grandmother of two, and enjoys walking and photography.”

https://westsussex.moderngov.co.uk/mgUserInfo.aspx?UID=237

though, again, not standing this year.

So, is this a coincidence? It seems unlikely as she DOES tweet about our area – although her tweets are private) you can see this Google listing:

Maybe she is/was a second home owner? If so, it would no doubt be useful for them to have a voice on the district council, there being so many of them!

Or maybe she has just moved or about to move into the district?

But not immersed in East Devin local politics with all that work in East Grinstead!

Seaton voters, if they see her about, might well have a few questions to ask her!