Our local health services: our last line of defence

From the Save Our Hospital Services Facebook site:

:… these guys are our last line of defence. They need to work harder at not being manipulated.

Health and Adult Care Scrutiny Committee, County Hall, 25 January 2018

“I take my Scrutiny duty very seriously,” declared Cllr Brian Greenslade (Barnstaple North) at the Devon County Council Health and Adult Care Scrutiny Committee meeting at County Hall on 25 January. Save our Hospital Services (SOHS) members from North Devon who attended this and many other such meetings know this to be only too true.

Indeed, were it not for Cllr Greenslade and his meticulous colleague, Cllr Claire Wright (Otter Valley) it is doubtful how much scrutiny by the Scrutiny Committee there would be at all. One thing is certain: given the scale, speed and scope of the changes now being pushed through in health and social care services in Devon, real information, real questions and real answers have never been so vital. It is literally a matter of life and death.

At a previous Scrutiny meeting, the Chair, Cllr Sara Randall Johnson, in clear cahoots with Cllr Rufus Gilbert, manipulated proceedings. The two managed to prevent Cllr Wright putting a motion she had already tabled, thus shutting down a debate that may have saved in-patient services at some community hospitals.

This so outraged some councillors and members of the public that their chorus of complaints and the consequent internal investigation prompted the county’s lawyers to lecture councillors as to their legal obligations to scrutinise. The investigation and warning came too late for the community hospitals, but could better behaviour be expected from now on?

Indeed, it could. But then, on 25 January, the Chair of the Standards Committee was sitting in. This time Cllr Wright was allowed to say quite a lot, pose many more questions, and state much more of the obvious in defence of our health and social care services.

However, far too many of our County Councillors still appear unwilling to spend time and effort educating themselves as to the issues, facts and figures, whilst being only too willing to swallow propaganda and projections put out by overpaid health bosses bent on making severe cuts to our NHS services.

No one, even councillors who have barely raised a whisper in opposition, is in any doubt as to the real motive for all these health service changes: cuts and cutbacks designed to save £557 million over the next five years. The aim is to ration, restrict and remove elements of care and treatment for however many people it takes to save that amount of money. Cost comes first, clinical need a poor second.

Dr Sonja Manton was again allowed to speak at great length. She is NHS Devon’s lead cost-cutter, qualified by means of a doctorate in Systems Dynamics, not qualified in Medicine or any form of clinical care. Which sort of gives the game away –as does her most obvious skill, talking for a very long time without saying anything at all.

When questioned by Councillor Wright, she appeared, as ever, not to have the required data or evidence to hand. Cue the now customary promise to look it up and pass it on. The pattern that follows has been obvious for more than 15 months now. The Scrutiny Committee ends up waiting a long time for what they have asked for – if they get it at all — making real scrutiny in public for the public impossible. The lack of real information, the failure to meet requests, the failure to resolve contradictions in presentations cause real difficulties for our County Councillors meeting after meeting – not least again on 25 January.

It has been reported that Devon’s Clinical Commissioning Groups are bent on steamrollering ‘Accountable Care Organisations’ into position from 1 April. To prove that the joke is on us for what is, after all, April Fool’s Day, they have given the Scrutiny Committee no information about them at all. This is particularly scandalous and frightening. As Brian Greenslade stated: “I want to know where we are…..we need to understand where we’ve got to and what this may mean.”

One faint beacon of light is the announcement, on the same day as the Scrutiny meeting was held, that NHS England will hold 12 week consultations on the implementation of ACOs https://www.england.nhs.uk/…/consultation-aco-contracts/ which puts a very slight delay in place. But the website does not elaborate on how much time after closure of consultation implementation could happen. The Consultation could well be the outcome of an exchange between Sarah Wollaston, Chair of the Health Select Committee, and Jeremy Hunt, Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, as well as an attempt to water down the possible impact of a Judicial Review, which is being filed by a group of Health Care professionals, to challenge the government’s attempt to circumvent Parliament and democratic scrutiny and allow ACOs to operate

ACOs are financially constrained, business-based American-style systems of healthcare purchasing and provision, which will pave the way for further privatisation and still more rationing and restriction of provision. Councillor Martin Shaw from Seaton had done a lot of research on ACOs and put his findings online. But, incredibly, he had to force the whole issue onto the Committee’s Agenda just to secure the very limited discussion that took place.

Until this announcement it was the case that ACOs (unless the Judicial Review has effect) were to be imposed without any debate, discussion or statute. So an ACO could be and, in many cases, will be, a private business, primarily accountable to shareholders and managers rather than patients and the public. And even now we don’t know how ‘public’ the consultation will be. As Jan Goffey, Mayor of Okehampton, declared, “Sick people should never be regarded as a profit-making opportunity.”

Eventually even the Chair, Sara Randall Johnson said, “We need more information.” We have heard her, and others, say this before. Is this a way of avoiding doing anything? Or is it something more cynical: a way of helping to destroy our NHS, but giving themselves the excuse that they just did not know?

If so, it will only be because they failed to find out – or scrutinise.”

Tories auction off access to PM and ministers at their annual ball

Readers may recall the tasteless joke made by Hugo Swire about the unemployed at the £10|15,000 per table Tory fundraising ball attended by porn barons, sex shop owners, former jailbirds and assorted other rich riff-raff in 2015:

“Joke of the night
Auctioneer Hugo Swire, a Tory MP, inviting bids for the flight, said: ‘For an extra £1,000 we will throw in a case of wine. For an extra £5,000, we will throw in Greece as well.”

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2948470/Porn-barons-Shady-financiers-Hedge-fund-kings-Welcome-secret-Tory-ball-ANDREW-PIERCE-reveals-went-closed-doors.html

as reported here:

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2015/02/11/hugo-swire-is-auctioneer-at-15000-per-head-tory-ball/

Readers will be pleased to know that this annual event continues to be a highlight of the posh-toff Tory donor calendar. The dinner was held, appropriately enough, in the Natural History Museum, home to many other dinosaurs, though perhaps not as rich as the living ones!

Reports include:

A Tory donors paying £55,000 in an auction to spend a day with Theresa May.

Other auction lots included a dinner at a restaurant hosted by Stanley Johnson and the Made in Chelsea star Georgia Toffolo – who appeared together on the ITV reality show I’m a Celebrity – which went for £15,000.

Another auction lot was a chance to “walk in the footsteps of Churchill” by having dinner with the defence secretary, Gavin Williamson, in the Churchill war rooms, which reportedly went for £30,000.

A bidder is understood to have paid £12,500 for a home-cooked dinner with the environment secretary, Michael Gove, and his wife, Sarah Vine, at their west London home.

Dinner in Edinburgh with Ruth Davidson, the Scottish Conservative leader, attracted bids of more than £15,000, while lunch with Liam Fox, the international trade secretary, proved somewhat less alluring, with bids around the £2,000 mark.

Departing guests were reportedly greeted by a flashmob of taxi drivers honking horns in protest at May’s speech at the World Economic Forum in Davos last month in which she said Uber had got things wrong but should not be shut down.

As reported in

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/feb/08/black-and-white-ball-dinner-with-defence-secretary-goes-for-30000-at-tory-fundraising-ball

Sidmouth: Swire fancies flats and car parking at Port Royal – or getting Prince Charles in!

He says Prince Charles’s architects would be “non-political” But in the absence of the Prince he says:

“My view of the Ham is that we could do multi-storey car parking there. It could be wrapped in retail or starter flats. There’s terrible parking pressure there already. You could have more people living in that part of the town.

“I think it would be a missed opportunity to just do something with the Drill Hall and not the rest of it. It requires an ambitious approach.”

And that’s not political? Pull the other one!

What do you bet Diviani comes to the same conclusion – by coincidence, of course!

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/bring-in-prince-charles-design-team-for-community-led-port-royal-regeneration-says-mp-1-5382156

Claire Wright wins debate at Exeter University – majority of students voting on her side!

From Claire Wright’s blog:

“Exeter University students attending a debate on Friday (2 Feb) voted overwhelmingly that they had no confidence in the government.

I was arguing the case for, with law student, Kyle Spencer, a member of the Conservative Party, who has become disillusioned with the government over Brexit and Theresa May’s leadership.

Arguing that people SHOULD have confidence in the government were former Exeter Conservative candidate in last year’s general election, barrister, James Taghdissian with his debating partner, Matthew Broughton, also a member of the Conservative Party.

Matthew reminded me more than a little of a young Jacob Rees Mogg….

There was a considerable amount of eloquent posturing between the two students, but fortunately, no reports of any scuffles in the bar afterwards …. !

My second political debate at the university, it was great fun, I really enjoyed it … and it was even better that we won so decisively (not that I am in the least bit competitive of course).”

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

Who fights for the NHS in East Devon? Your Independent councillors!

At today’s Save Our Hospital Services demo in Exeter today. East Devon Alliance and Claire Wright make their mark but not an East Devon Tory (including our two East Devon MPs) to be seen!

East Devon Alliance DCC Councillor Martin Shaw

East Devon Alliance EDDC Councillor Cathy Gardner

DCC Independent Councillor Claire Wright

East Devon Alliance Councillors Marianne Rixson with East Devon Alliance Councillor Cathy Gardner

One of the many interviews the independent councillors did on the day.

Claire Wright and Martin Shaw fighting heroically for our NHS

Thank heavens we have Claire Wright and Martin Shaw fighting so hard for our NHS on a daily basis and don’t have to leave the fight to Swire, Diviani, Sarah Randall-Johnson and East Devon Tories – or there would be no fight at all!!!

Holding NHS Property Services to account:
http://www.claire-wright.org/index.php/post/nhs_property_services_and_nhs_managers_requested_to_fully_engage_over_commu

Getting those winter performance figures that Randall-Johnson was happy to wait months for:
http://www.claire-wright.org/index.php/post/new_devon_ccg_to_provide_performance_winter_pressures_reports_within_days

Social care not working:
http://www.claire-wright.org/index.php/post/latest_devon_social_care_survey_reveals_concerns_among_people_about_service

Ambulance service under intense pressure due to cost-cutting:
http://www.claire-wright.org/index.php/post/devon_county_council_health_scrutiny_committee_records_its_concerns_over_am

Decisions on community hospitals:
Health Scrutiny hears there will be no precipitate decisions on community hospitals – local conversations with CCG and RD&E offer chance to shape ‘place-based health systems’ around towns

Declining performance:
Devon’s health system’s declining performance over last 12 months – and Health Scrutiny still waiting for winter crisis evidence

“Alienated voters ‘don’t feel Brexit will help them retake control’ over decision making”

“The vast majority of British people feel they have little if any control over decisions that affect their lives and the future of the country, a new study has found.

Voters increasingly feel decision making has been taken out of their hands and is being wielded by a remote clique of politicians at national level, it found.

The report, by one of the country’s most senior civil servants, found growing anger over the fact that people do not feel they are being listened to and that their views are frequently ignored.

Lord Kerslake cited the Grenfell fire tragedy as a damning example of what can happen when politicians ignore the demands of people on the ground.

Lord Kerslake told The Telegraph: “We are one of the most over centralised countries in Europe and there is a growing gap between those who are governed and those who govern.

“The terrible tragedy of Grenfell Tower might possibly have been avoided if one of the richest boroughs in the country had listened more to its poorest residents.

“Power can no longer be viewed as belonging to decision-makers a the centre to be ‘given away’. We must find a radical new way to involve people from every community, every street and every home across the country in the decisions that affect them.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/01/21/alienated-voters-dont-feel-brexit-will-help-retake-control-decision/

“Devon schools worse off than those in London by more than £500 per pupil”

When our MPs tell us that we in Devon are receiving an extra £7.5 for education, perhaps point this out to them:

“The Government’s new national funding formula will mean an extra £7.5million for schools in Devon next year.

But they will still be left £268 per pupil short of the national average, say Devon County Council. …”

http://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/devon-schools-worse-those-london-1067723

Fair?

Two whipping Tories – or just one?

Anyone notice how Brandon Lewis (Chairman, Conservative Party – whose new job is to whip the ageing party’s members into better digital shape) looks and sounds just like EDDC Conservative Councillor Phil Twiss (the man who is their Chief Whip but assures us he has never whipped anyone ever and who has been in charge of EDDC’s digital policies).

Has anyone ever seen them in the same room together!

A new East Devon Business Forum?

And just how will EDDC decide who are the top 50 employers? Turnover, number of employees, closeness to Woodbury or Otterton? Or big developers? Businesses submitting the most planning applications or biggest landholders? Or might it be social responsibility – lol? Environmental credentials – lol? Employee stakeholders – lol?

And how will they treat these “top 50 compared to the bottom several thousand?

Shades of the discredited, run by disgraced ex-councillor Graham Brown, East Devon Business Forum? And, here it comes again – scrutiny … conflicts of interest …

Owl ruffles its feathers …

“For the many or the few” to quote someone-or-other!

“Develop more effective business engagement though:

1) Publishing quarterly business bulletins and increasing SME readership;

2) Identifying and establishing communication with up to 6 Key Ambassador businesses in East Devon

3) developing and maintaining a contact list of our top 50 employers;

4) Identifying and making contact with businesses comprising our 4 GESP priority sectors (Smart Logistics, Data Analytics, Knowledge Based Industries and Environmental Futures).

Click to access 170118-joint-overview-scrutiny-agenda-combined.pdf

Swire’s biggest concern this week: pensioners in Zimbabwe

Oral Answers to Questions – Foreign and Commonwealth Office: Veterans Abroad: Military Covenant (9 Jan 2018)
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2018-01-09a.155.1&s=speaker%3A11265#g155.2

Hugo Swire: What discussions he has had with the Secretary of State for Defence on the application of the Military Covenant’s Duty of Care to veterans living abroad.

Oral Answers to Questions – Foreign and Commonwealth Office: Veterans Abroad: Military Covenant (9 Jan 2018)
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2018-01-09a.155.1&s=speaker%3A11265#g155.4

Hugo Swire: Of course, we very much welcome that. According to the campaigning charity, ZANE: Zimbabwe A National Emergency, there are 600 former British servicemen—those who have served the Crown—and widows of servicemen living in considerable pensioner poverty in Zimbabwe. Does the Minister agree that although the financial responsibility is that of the Government in Harare, the moral…

“Conservative party’s refusal to admit plunging membership numbers is embarrassing, says Grant Shapps”

“A former Conservative chairman has warned Theresa May that the party’s refusal to admit to its plunging membership rolls is “embarrassing”.

Grant Shapps urged the Prime Minister to “come clean” about how few people are paid up members – after a party campaigner suggested the figure is as low as 70,000.

It is four years since the Tories, under David Cameron, reluctantly revealed their membership total, refusing to respond to requests since for up-to-date information.

Most estimates put the figure at around 100,000, but the head of the Campaign for Conservative Democracy said he believed it had dropped to just 70,000.

In stark contrast, Labour said it had 552,000 members last summer. Both the Scottish National Party (118,000) and the Liberal Democrats (103,000) also reported six-figure totals.

Now Mr Shapps, who was sacked as chairman in 2015, has said “transparency” is vital, even if the membership figure turned out to to be “embarrassing”.

He warned that “coming clean about membership is step number one” in rebuilding the Conservative Party’s campaigning strength for the next general election.

Mr Shapps told the BBC that he had first told Mr Cameron, in 2013, that it was “embarrassing not to publish the figures and it will help us increase the membership – and it did”.

And he said the party needed to follow the lead of Labour and the Lib Dems in allowing members to play a role in policy formation.

The criticism comes after a report by academics at Queen Mary University, suggested at least 44 per cent of Tory members are over 65 and 71 per cent are male. …”

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/conservative-party-membership-numbers-grant-shapps-theresa-may-tory-members-david-cameron-a8143956.html

Rank and file Tories fear for the end of their party

This appears to be a legitimate Conservative party group whichis highly critical of attempt to de-democratise their party. The views are their ownand are shown verbatim:

From the blog of:
http://copov.blogspot.co.uk/2017/12/last-chance-to-save-conservative-party.html

CAMPAIGN FOR CONSERVATIVE DEMOCRACY
(COPOV: Conservative, One Person One Vote)

“Friday, December 15, 2017
Last Chance to save the Conservative Party

Changes to the Conservative Party Constitution
or
How to give more power to the hierarchy

At a meeting of the National Convention held on 25th November in Birmingham the following changes to the Conservative Party Constitution were discussed and passed to be formally proposed at the next National Convention meeting on 16th March 2018. About 100 members turned up on 25th November for this meeting out of the 1,000 members of the Convention. For only the second time in the last fifteen years ordinary Party members were excluded from the Convention even as observers.

If these rule changes go through you may as well bring down the final curtain on the Conservative Party and on it will the written:

The Tory Party. The End

1) “Constituency Associations” are abolished.

In future we will just have “Associations” which will consist of one or more Constituency Associations.

This is a sad day. For 150 years the Constituency Association has been the building block of the Conservative Party. No longer. This is the management of decline.

2) The Annual Meeting of the National Convention to be abolished.
Voting for Officers of the Convention will now be done “online”. Officers will give reports “online”

This means that there will be no hustings meeting at which the candidates will speak. It also means that there cannot be questions to the candidates. In the early days of the Convention a motion was passed calling for hustings at which the candidates were questioned. The motion was passed overwhelmingly. The Officers ignored it. Now there is no chance. Also no opportunity to question the Officers on their reports. This is North Korean style democracy.

Why don’t they just abolish the National Convention and have an Annual General Meeting to which every member is invited and at which the Party Chairman is elected by the members?

3) Selection of Candidates to be centrally controlled.

15 SELECTION OF CANDIDATES

15.1 The selection of all candidates, including Parliamentary, Police Commissioners, Elected Mayors and local government candidates shall follow a process in accordance with rules and guidance published from time to time by the Committee on Candidates of the Board of the Party (as established under Schedule 6 of the Party Constitution)

All further articles up to and including 15.2.5 to be removed

The entire section of the Constitution which spells out the way in which candidates are to be selected has been deleted. All selection will now be determined by the Committee on Candidates which will also determine the procedures for selecting candidates. So a small group of appointed people unaccountable to the membership will now determine all candidates. This small group of unaccountable people will effectively decide who shall become a Conservative Member of Parliament and from them who will be in Government. What happened to democracy? This is disgraceful. It shows complete contempt for the people. What have we come to?

By adopting this proposal the last vestiges of any rights for Party members has been eliminated. Now they have no rights at all!

4) Conservative Policy Forum
Under the existing Constitution:

65 The Board shall appoint a Director of the Conservative Policy Forum whose responsibilities shall include the formation of a structure to co-ordinate the activities of the Political Deputy Chairmen of the Area Management Executives and Constituency Associations.

This is to be replaced by:

65 The Board shall appoint a Director of the Conservative Policy Forum on the recommendation of the Chairman of the National Convention, whose responsibilities shall include co-ordinating the policy-related activities of the Associations and Area Management Executives.

Why should the Chairman of the National Convention recommend the Director of the Conservative Policy Forum – to increase his power or a nice bit of cronyism?

66.3 Three representatives elected by the Political Deputy Chairmen of the Area Management Executives in accordance with the provisions of Schedule 5 .
This provision of the Constitution was never adhered to so instead of enforcing it what did they do? Delete it! So now, every member of the Council of the Conservative Policy Forum is appointed. Jobs for the boys!

5) Area Councils
The Constitution states:

4 Any member of an Association within an Area may stand for election within that Area to the Area Management Executive provided they are proposed and seconded by members of an Area Council in the Area in which they are standing for election.

5 The election shall take place at the meeting of the Area Council. The election shall be by secret ballot. The Returning Officer shall be a member of the professional staff of the Party, nominated for the purpose by the Board.

The only problem is that there is no requirement for members to be told when the date of the meeting of the Area Council is or indeed who are members of it, so they have become self perpetuating oligarchies.

6) National Convention
The existing Constitution states that:

5 Any nominee for any such office or post referred to in Paragraph 2.2 herein shall have been a Member of the National Convention for not less than two years.

This is now replaced by:

5 Any nominee for any such office or post referred to in Paragraph 2.2 herein shall have been a Member of the National Convention for not less than the two years preceding the date of close of nominations.

So you cannot stand for office until you are in the third year as a member and are currently a member The effect of this is that none of the officers will have any long term historical knowledge of the workings of the Convention

6 Any nominee for the office of President shall have been an elected member of the Board for one year.

This is changed to:

6 Any nominee for the office of President shall have been an elected member of the Board for one year preceding the date of close of nominations.
Same comment as above

It is time for the Conservative Members of Parliament to stop being so supine and get off sitting on their hands and oppose these changes. If they don’t, then at the next General Election the only activists left in their constituencies will be themselves!
Posted by John Strafford at 9:32 AM”

http://copov.blogspot.co.uk/2017/12/last-chance-to-save-conservative-party.html

“Social care postcode gap widens for older people”: EDDC tries to claw back its mistakes too late

Last week, desperate Tories put a much-too-little! much-too-late motion to East Devon District Council:

“To ask the Leader of East Devon District Council to request Sarah Wollaston, Chair of the Parliamentary Health Select Committee, to investigate the effects on Rural Communities of the STP actions and to test if Rural Proofing Policies have been correctly applied to these decisions in order to protect these communities”

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2017/12/13/effect-of-sustainability-and-transformation-plans-on-rural-communities-east-devon-tories-miss-the-boat-then-moan-about-it/

As Owl noted at the time, this is somewhat rich, as their Leader, Paul Diviani, voted at Devon County Council AGAINST sending the document to the Secretary of State for Health (where this could have been highlighted in the covering submission) against the instructions of his EDDC Tory Councillors and never having consulted other Devon Tory councils he was supposed to represent. He was ably assisted in this by former EDDC Chairman Sarah Randall Johnson, who as Chair of the DCC committee, railroaded their choice of action by effectively silencing any opposition (EDW passim)

This led to the accelerated closure of community beds in Honiton and Seaton, following on from earlier closures in Axminster and Ottery St Mary.

A subsequent vote of “No Confidence” in Diviani at EDDC (brought by non-Tory councillors) was defeated by the very Tory councillors he had defied!

Now we read that “Social care postcode gap widens for older people” and that social care is breaking down in deprived areas – many of which are inevitably rural.

… The knock-on effects for the NHS see elderly patients end up in hospital unnecessarily after accidents at home, while they cannot be discharged unless they have adequate community care in place. Among men, 30% in the poorest third of households needed help with an activity of daily living (ADL), compared with 14% in the highest income group. Among women, the need for such help was 30% among the poorest third and 20% in the highest third.

There is a growing army of unpaid helpers, such as family and friends, propping up the system. Around two-thirds of adults aged 65 and over, who had received help for daily activities in the past month, had only received this from unpaid helpers, the figures revealed.

Spending on adult social care by local authorities fell from £18.4bn in 2009-10 to just under £17bn in 2015-16, according to the respected King’s Fund. It represents a real-terms cut of 8%. It estimates there will be an estimated social care funding gap of £2.1bn by 2019-20.

While an extra £2bn was provided for social care over two years, a huge gap remains after the latest budget failed to address the issue. Theresa May was forced to abandon plans to ask the elderly to help pay for social care through the value of their homes, after it was blamed for contributing to her disastrous election result. The government has promised to bring forward some new proposals by the summer, but many Tory MPs and Conservative-run councils are desperate for faster action.

Ministers have dropped plans to put a cap on care costs by 2020 – a measure proposed by Sir Andrew Dilnot’s review of social care and backed by David Cameron when he was prime minister.

Izzi Seccombe, the Tory chair of the Local Government Association’s community wellbeing board, said: “Social care need is greater in more deprived areas and this, in turn, places those councils under significant financial pressures. Allowing councils to increase council tax to pay for social care, while helpful in some areas, is of limited use in poorer areas because their weaker tax base means they are less able to raise funds.

“In more deprived areas there is also likely to be a higher number of people who rely on councils to pay for their care. This, in turn, puts even more pressure on the local authority.

“If we are to bridge the inequality gap in social care, we need long-term sustainable funding for the sector. It was hugely disappointing that the chancellor found money for the NHS but nothing for adult social care in the autumn budget. We estimate adult social care faces an annual funding gap of £2.3bn by 2020.”

Simon Bottery, from the King’s Fund, said: “We know that need will be higher in the most deprived areas – people get ill earlier and have higher levels of disability, and carry that through into social care need.

“We also know that the councils that have the greater need to spend are, on average, raising less money through the precept [earmarked for funding social care].”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2017/dec/16/social-care-for-elderly-postcode-gap-grows

Effect of Sustainability and Transformation plans on rural communities – East Devon Tories miss the boat then moan about it!

Motion at today’s EDDC full council meeting.

Recall that EDDC council leader voted AGAINST submitting the Sustainability and Transformation Partnership’s plan to the Secretary of State for Health at the meeting of Devon County Council’s Health Scrutiny Committee AGAINST the wishes of his own district council.

Now, that same district council, whose Tory members absolved him of blame for this act are making a TOKEN fuss about its consequences!

“Motion – The effects on Rural Communities of the Sustainability Transformation Partnership (STP) actions in East Devon

“To ask the Leader of East Devon District Council to request Sarah Wollaston, Chair of the Parliamentary Health Select Committee, to investigate the effects on Rural Communities of the STP actions and to test if Rural Proofing Policies have been correctly applied to these decisions in order to protect these communities”.

Proposer Councillor Mike Allen Seconded by Councillor Ian Hall
Supported by:
Councillor Dean Barrow; Councillor Stuart Hughes; Councillor Brian Bailey; Councillor Mark Williamson; Councillor Mike Howe; Councillor Iain Chubb; Councillor Simon Grundy’; Councillor Graham Godbeer; Councillor Tom Wright; Councillor Jenny Brown”

Click to access 131217-combined-council-agenda-and-minute-book.pdf

EDA Councillor Shaw: “Pursuit of elusive ‘devolution’ deal is leading to a new layer of bureaucracy: an unelected, one-party ‘Heart of the South West’ combined authority”

This week’s DCC Cabinet meeting approved a Conservative proposal to set up a formal Joint Committee with Somerset (report at item 7 of the agenda). Objections were raised to aspects of the proposal by the leaders of the Liberal Democrat and Labour groups, and I spoke on behalf of the Non-Aligned Group (which comprises the three Independents and one Green councillor). You can watch the debate, and read my speech below:

“I think we know what is going with devolution. We have a government which is ripping the heart out of local government spending, pushing services to the border of viability; this is causing enormous difficulties for this council but also driving down local incomes and so weakening our regional economy. But at the same time it is holding out the carrot of giving us limited extra powers and returning a modest bit of the lost funding, if we jump through its ‘devolution’ hoops. The government barely seems to know what it’s doing over ‘devolution’ and the hoops keep changing, but we still have to guess what they are and do our best to jump.

And so we end up with the papers in front of us today. We are asked to endorse a ‘vision’ of higher productivity and economic growth and create an extra layer of bureaucracy to support it. The problem is that the vision bears little relation to reality. The ambition is to double the regional economy in 18 years, i.e. to increase its size by 100% – this requires a compound growth rate of 3.94%. In the real world, the actual growth rate in the SW over the last 18 years has been 30% and the annual rate 1.47%. Nationally, the UK economy has never grown by more than 3% p.a. in any of the last 18 years, and is currently veering downwards below 1.5%.

So we are asked to believe that we can increase local productivity growth from below the national average to well above it, and thereby buck not only regional but also national growth trends. How are we going to that? By waving the wand of the Hinkley nuclear white elephant and hoping that it somehow spreads some stardust over Devon? I can tell you that so far the LEP has produced almost nothing which offers help to the economy in the rural, small-town, coastal Devon which most of us represent.

Let’s take a reality check – if I come to the budget meeting and tell you, ‘the economy will grow by 4%, business rate receipts will shoot up, so spend, spend, spend’, you are going to look on me as a madman, and rightly so. So why should Devon County Council buy this phoney prospectus? And why should we embark on radical constitutional change to support it?

I know this is only a proposal for a Joint Committee, with limited financial implications. But it is clearly presented as enabling us to ‘move relatively quickly to establish a Combined Authority’ if that is deemed necessary. We already have 3 tiers of local government. This is the beginning of creating a fourth tier, without a mandate, without elections, and without balanced political representation.

95% of the people of Devon don’t even know they’re living in something called the ‘Heart of the South West’. It says everything about the lack of democracy in this so-called devolution that we are using this PR-speak rather than the county names which people understand. I know the Government prefers cross-boundary devolution projects, but Cornwall got a stand-alone deal, and we are much bigger in both population and area.

Apart from Hinkley there is no strong reason for us to tie ourselves to Somerset rather than Cornwall or Dorset. Our local government is being distorted to support an anachronistic nuclear project – for the benefit of companies owned by the French and Chinese states – instead of developing renewable energy for which we have a good basis in the SW.

I have this Cabinet down as a group of a level-headed people. But here we have fantasy economics, making claims which are about as credible as the figures on Boris’s battlebus, and constitutional change which means that Devon people and their councillors are asked to start handing over democratic control to a one-party quango in conjunction with unelected business people.

Since the Government is always changing its mind about devolution, there is no reason why we shouldn’t change our minds too. I ask you to

go back to the Government with a realistic agenda for Devon, that addresses the needs of all areas of the county and all sectors of our economy and society
back off from this unnecessary proposal for a joint committee.

Pursuit of elusive ‘devolution’ deal is leading to a new layer of bureaucracy: an unelected, one-party ‘Heart of the South West’ combined authority

What do you have to do to get sacked if you are a Tory these days?

“As a prime minister drained of authority struggles to hold her party together, ambitious ministers feel increasingly able to cock a snook with impunity.

This week’s rows over Boris Johnson’s dangerous handling of a disagreement with Iran, and Priti Patel’s freelance policymaking in the Middle East may seem a coincidence.

But the conduct of the foreign secretary is bound together with that of the international development secretary.

Both Mr Johnson and Ms Patel are able to play fast and loose because normal collective cabinet disciplines no longer apply. The prime minister is afraid to reprimand or sack. In this government it is everyone for themselves. …”

and yet there are people who will continue to vote for them.

It says as much about their voters as it does about their Ministers and MPs.

And so many of their voters in East Devon – where we had our own mini-scandal when Diviani voted against his own district councillors at county council over closure of community hospitals.

Did Tory district councillors sack him? No, they rallied round him and agreed to keep him not just as a councillor but as their Leader.

Such is political life today. Thank you Tory voters – for worse than nothing.

“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

The Nolan Principles of Public Life – a travesty

If Westminster staff need protection from MPs then we are obviously electing the wrong people. Yet, unless they resign – which they rarely do – we cannot get rid of them. In local government we can’t get rid of a councillor even if he deliberately votes against his own party’s wishes (and when members of his own party then protect him after he has done so).

It is even more unlikely that any Conservative MPs will be made to resign – even if they admit to calling an employee “sugar tits” (no asterisks for Owl on this one) and ordering her to make his sex shop purchases – both of which an MP has allegedly admitted to doing – because of their precarious grasp on power. Power which is held only because of a £1 billion bribe to a so-called Christian-values-based party the DUP – with its strong links to the fundamentalist Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster.

There must be a way of local voters being able to deselect an MP (or a councillor) when he or she is shown to be totally unfit for office, surely? Even a prison sentence doesn’t stop someone being a councillor – it has to be for more than a year!

“There is a requirement to inform the House, if Members are arrested on
criminal charges, of the cause for which they are detained from their
service in Parliament. The House is also informed when a Member has been
committed to prison for a criminal offence. In such circumstances, the
Speaker would normally make an oral statement or lay a copy of the
letter on the Table. The Representation of the People Act 1981
disqualifies from membership of the House any serving Member detained
for any offence in the UK or the Republic of Ireland for more than a
year or detained indefinitely, and their seat becomes vacant.

The House of Commons Library has compiled a list of MPs imprisoned since
1979 …”

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/mps_with_criminal_records

We obviously cannot rely on the Nolan Principles for Public Life to protect us at any level of government – local, regional or national.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/the-7-principles-of-public-life/the-7-principles-of-public-life–2