Exmouth Jounal neglects to name party (Conservative) of naughty Deputy Mayor of Exeter Bruce de Saram

Look below and see if you can spot which party naughty councillor Bruce de Saram belongs to!  Hint: he isn’t Labour, Lib Dem, Green or Independent!

“The [Tory] deputy mayor of Exmouth has apologised for a ‘regrettable’ decision to illegally park in a disabled bay.

Councillor Bruce de Saram [Tory] apologised after his car was spotted parked in the disabled bay at the town hall car park.

Pictures show the Littleham [Tory] councillor’s car with a ‘deputy mayor on duty’ sign in the window taken on Thursday, March 7, this year.

Cllr de Saram [Tory] told The Journal he parked in the bay as he was attending a meeting at the town hall and received a fine on his return to his vehicle.

He said the fine was paid ‘promptly’ out of his own income and has treated the incident as a learning experience.

“I regret any inconvenience I caused by parking there and this is a learning experience for me,” he said.

Disabled bays in the UK are reserved for official ‘blue badge’ carriers and it is illegal to park in one without a permit.”

https://www.exmouthjournal.co.uk/news/deputy-mayor-apology-over-disabled-parking-1-5962700

Not registered to vote in local election on 2 May? Do it NOW – never was your vote needed more

If you don’t want “more of the same” fusty, mostly male, mostly old Tory councillors and you haven’t registered to vote, please do – it takes less than 5 minutes. And you could change East Devon by voting for Independents!

The deadline is looming for people to register to vote in upcoming town, parish and district council elections.

Residents who are not already registered at their current address have until midnight on Friday, April 12, to be able to vote in the elections taking place in May.

On Thursday, May 2, registered voters will go to the polls to have their say on who will represent them on their town, parish and district councils.

Mark Williams, electoral registration officer for East Devon said: “These elections are an opportunity to make your voice heard and have a say on who represents you on issues that directly affect your day-to-day life.

“If you recently turned 18 or moved home, it is particularly important that you act to ensure that you are registered to vote.

“It takes just five minutes online and means that you can take part in this important election.”

The deadline for applications to vote by post is also approaching at 5pm on Monday, April 15. To request a postal vote ring 01395 571529.

https://www.exmouthjournal.co.uk/news/east-devon-elections-vote-registration-deadline-1-5959793

Days to local elections – 37: picture and quote of the day

Mark Williams (EDDC CEO),  Paul Diviani (then Leader) and Hugo Swire (current MP) illustrate their cosy relationship.

Diviani quote after success in previous election:

“EDDC Leader Paul Diviani’s pledge when he took office in May 2011:

Turning to his own vision for the future and his style of leadership, Councillor Diviani said: “Some call it safe, clean and green – to which I would add seen.

“Safe comes through good design at the planning stage, through working with the police, fire and rescue and all the other services that deal with our society’s well-being, with particular emphasis on the vulnerable of whatever age.

“Clean is the public realm – paths and pavements on which we travel, the quality of our parks and pleasure grounds, efficient and convenient services, such as waste recycling and collection.

“Green will come as no surprise! Two-thirds of our district is nationally designated as Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty, which makes East Devon such a fabulous place to live, work and play.

“Seen is about perception and reality and is all about effective communication. All too often we read that EDDC doesn’t listen, doesn’t care, sits in an ivory tower – the list goes on. The cynical view of the last government – decide, consult, do it all anyway – is not my approach.”

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2014/07/18/clean-green-seen-or-pale-male-stale-you-decide/

So, who do you believe?

Scarily similar to East Devon! Maybe we should twin!

“Nick Meekins, mayor from 2010-11, has aligned himself with a group of former Tories who are to challenge for seats on Fenland District Council as independents.

Mr Meekins, who also wants to return to Wisbech Town Council, said those who had already left the Tory Party “confirmed my decision because the reasons they cited for leaving were almost identical to my thoughts”

He said: “I don’t think my opinions of the Tory leadership on Wisbech and Fenland Council should come as a surprise to anyone who reads the local press.

“In my view there are a small group of uber Tories who dominate the party locally, holding as they do key positions and ruling by selecting sycophants as candidates and threatening deselection to any Tory who may not completely toe the line, and being abusive/aggressive to non-Tory councillors.”

He said so far as Wisbech Town Council was concerned he felt it was a “poor decision and against professional advice” to take over Wisbech Castle.

Taking over public toilets and closing some of them was wrong, he said, and support for “hare brained schemes” was another issue. He cited the water clock and children’s playground for the market and the glass ‘watchtower’ in High Street as projects he disagreed with.

“Surely the town council should be working at realistic schemes that come within their remit that will actually benefit the town,” he said.

He also criticised “a Tory biased questionnaire using the town council staff to publish it. This is probably illegal” and “disrespecting the Union Flag” over the town hall as another reason.

Mr Meekins said he remained angry over the funeral last year of former mayor Patrick O’Dell when the town council did not send a representative.

At the time town clerk Terry Jordan said: “The council received no notification of any funeral arrangements. Notice of the funeral was given simply by way of a public notice in a local newspaper.”

He added: “I am fairly sure that the majority of the current Wisbech town councillors, who did not serve on the council at the same time as him, would not have known Mr O’Dell. Those who had served with him could make their own decision as to whether to attend the funeral.”

Cllr Steve Tierney, who is co-ordinating publicity for the Tory local election campaign, dismissed the rise of the independents – and others -in a blog he published at the weekend.

“Well it’s that time again,” he wrote. “The time when we all go out and ask people to come vote for us.

“The time when the opposition and the Usual Suspects start sneering, lying and slating the Conservatives – while claiming that it is the other way around. “The time when the Wisbech Standard begins its weekly campaign to get somebody, anybody, elected who isn’t a Conservative.

“The time when people nobody has seen in their ward for the last four years turn up and start pretending that they are a better alternative than the people who work all year around.” [Too true – but this applies to individuals of ALL parties!]

He added: “Never mind. The sun is shining. The air is fresh. And the people I am meeting in my ward as I canvass are very pleasant and very positive.

“I have every faith that the people in Wisbech broadly know the truth, no matter what smears the collective opposition try to run with.

“As ever, it will be what it will be. We shall see.

“See you all soon, on the doorstep. Looking forward to it!”

https://www.wisbechstandard.co.uk/news/nick-meekins-former-wisbech-mayor-on-independent-bid-for-council-1-5958046

THAT local conservative party questionnaire: data protection experts really don’t like it!

Another correspondent has added more information on that (now looking rather dodgy) questionnare being circulated by our local Conservative party. Perhaps time for a rethink on it Tories?

Owl is no expert on this but it seems a couple of experts agree! But then again Tories (ie Michael Gove) don’t like experts!

“As someone with 25+ years experience in IT and with specific knowledge of data protection, I would say that your correspondent is spot on with their analysis except for the following respects…

When you are collecting the data you need to provide a Privacy Policy which states explicitly which of the 6 legal bases you are relying on to legally store and process the data, and if you are relying on the Legitimate Interests basis, then you have to state explicitly what the legitimate interests are.

Whatever legal basis you are using, you need to be explicit about the purposes for collecting the data and the uses to which you are putting it. Future use of the data must be limited to the specific purposes you have declared when collecting the data.

If you are not relying on any of the 5 legal bases which do NOT require explicit consent, then you need to collect and retain proof of explicit consent having been given for the SPECIFIC uses you will put the data to.

It seems to me to be impossible for the Conservative Party to use 4 of the 6 legal bases: Contract (no contract being formed), Legal obligation (i.e. required by law), Vital interests (life saving) or Public Task (i.e. by a legally official role for a legally official purpose – example would be for processing Council Tax).

“Legitimate Interests” generally would be those interests clearly implied by e.g. the survey i.e. to statistically analyse the survey. However, collection of personally identifiable information does not seem to be necessary for the statistical analysis of the information, so that would not seem to be a Legitimate Interests for storing that. In any case, GDPR clearly states that if you are relying on Legitimate Interest then you have to state clearly in the Privacy Information accompanying the data collection exactly what your Legitimate Interest is.

Finally, political data (which this rather obviously is) is considered to be “Special Category” data, and this requires a far stricter interpretation of legal basis as defined in Section 9(2) of GDPR which has much tighter requirements for implied consent, and stricter requirements on gaining explicit consent.

My personal opinion, therefore, is that the collection of this personal data is illegal under GDPR for several reasons, and the Conservative Party should immediately be reported to the Information Commissioner for illegal processing of data.

P.S. “Special Category” data is also likely to require especially attention to security to avoid the risks of it being stolen or inadvertently shared (or indeed accessed by even authorised people for uses beyond that for which it was collected), both during the initial collection of the data and in the subsequent storage and processing.

Indeed GDPR requires the Data Controller to have explicitly considered the security requirements for the data, and to be able to demonstrate this regardless of whether any data was lost or inadvertently processed.

It is possible that Conservative Central Office provides specially constructed IT infrastructure to allow the secure collection and processing of personally identifiable political data, but if not, then I would suspect that the local Conservative Association is very unlikely to have either the knowledge / skills / money to create such a secure environment, in which case they would be guilty of a further GDPR offence.”

Is the East Devon Conservatives election questionnaire breaking Data Protection rules?

An EDW blog reader who stresses they are NOT a lawyer or data protection specialist, but who has extensive knowledge of the subject, has this to say about the questionnaire currently being circulated by the local Conservative party as part of their electioneering:

“Your story on the East Devon Conservatives’ questionnaire led me to take a look at their privacy policy available here:

https://www.eastdevonconservatives.org/privacy

If you have contact with anybody who knows about GDPR and the Data Protection Act 2018, you might like to get them to take a look. My knowledge is better than average but not complete. However, I think the policy is dodgy:

Item 3 says ‘All processing is carried out by consent’. The problem here is that Consent cannot be assumed to have been given. It MUST be a positive action on the part of the data subject so in the case of the questionnaire that you mention, there must be a means by which respondents can give their consent to having their data stored and processed.

Item 3 adds ‘or public interest’. This isn’t a lawful basis for storing and processing data. The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) has a list of the 6 permitted lawful bases here:

https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/guide-to-the-general-data-protection-regulation-gdpr/lawful-basis-for-processing/

There are 6 lawful bases:

Consent (as I say this MUST be given by a positive action – it cannot be assumed to have been given or be ‘given’ by means of a pre-checked tickbox. Contract (e.g. if you buy something from an organisation, they can store your data in order to complete the contract).

Legal obligation (can be used if the organisation needs to store and process personal data ‘to comply with a common law or statutory obligation’. Vital interest (to be used if the data must be processed in order to protect somebody’s life so passing medical history to A&E if you have an accident falls under this one).

Public task (The ICO says that this one ‘can apply to any organisation that exercises official authority or carries out tasks in the public interest’. It would be interesting to see whether the ICO would consider the Conservatives’ distribution of election material to be in the public interest).

Legitimate interests (is a catch-all category but the ICO says ‘It is likely to be most appropriate where you use people’s data in ways they would reasonably expect and which have a minimal privacy impact, or where there is a compelling justification for the processing’. This is one that’s used, for example, by membership organisations because a member would expect the organisation to retain and process members’ details. Again, it would be interesting to see this one tested with the ICO in the case of the Conservatives.)

Overall, I think it could be argued that the Conservatives should be relying only on Consent when it comes to campaigning activities. Obviously Legitimate interest is the the correct lawful basis in the case of members of the Association. However, if they’re relying on Consent, the questionnaire must include a checkbox that respondents must tick in order to give their consent to having their data stored by the Conservative Association.

Item 6 relates to Special category data which includes some of the data identified in your story viz. ‘ethnic origin, political opinions, and religious, philosophical and other beliefs’. The Data protection legislation says that this data requires special handling. This is a complex area but it doesn’t look as if the East Devon Conservatives have understood it.

Item 8 is their data retention policy. They appear to be saying that they may hold the data for up to 10 years ‘two election cycles’. For ordinary voters who are not members of the Association, this looks to me to be excessive.

Item 10 appears to say that they’ll share people’s data with a surprisingly wide range of organisations: ‘entities of Political Party associations, federations, branches, groups and affiliates’. I doubt that this permitted under the legislation without specific consent.

Item 11 says, amongst other things, ‘you have the right to object to certain types of processing, such as direct marketing’. They appear to be confusing the Data Protection Act 2018 with the Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations (PECR). This sits alongside the DPA but isn’t part of it. PECR governs the use of personal data for electronic marketing e.g. email, text messaging, telephones etc.

Item 11 also says ‘you also have the right to be subject to the legal effects of automated processing or profiling’ [my emphasis]. This looks like a typo.

Item 11 also says you have the ‘Right to judicial review:’. This seems to be a curious and confusing way of telling people that they have the right to complain to the ICO which is dealt with in Item 12.

I think one of the difficulties of this privacy policy is that it is trying to cover all instances of gathering, storing and processing of data by the Association. If somebody contacts their local Councillor or MP with, for example, a housing problem, then Legitimate interest would apply. The same is true of somebody applying to join the Association. However, to collect, store and process personal information gathered through the type of questionnaire you describe is probably (and I emphasise probably) in breach of the legislation.”

Local Tories panic at last minute – and ask what you think (too little, too late!)

The Local Tories are asking the electorate at the 11th Hour! (A BIT TOO LATE!).

Why?

Because they know they have let us down, while Independent councillors have been fighting our battles, not them!

Whilst our Independent District Councillors have been listening and dealing with local people’s issues and concerns for years the “East Devon Conservative Association” may be waking up to the fact that rather than follow their Central Offices National Policies, they maybe should listen occasionally to what is happening in their local area!

A questionnaire is being distributed by the East Devon Branch of the Conservative Party, just 5 weeks before Local Parish Town and District Elections asking for local people’s thoughts!

There is however a “health warning” on the leaflet in very small print!

The types of information we may collect about you, will probably include your name, address, and contact information and information about your ethnic origin, political opinions, and religious, philosophical and other beliefs. The data you provide will be retained by the Conservative Party, its Candidates and its MPs”.

Nice to know the Tories want to collate a database on us!

The questionnaire first asks several questions about the ward and then asks
“Are there any local issues or concerns you would like to raise?

Then they ask which of 14 issues are the 3 issues that should be prioritised. Looking at the list most local people would hope that their Councillors were concentrating on ALL of them, but at least the local Conservatives MIGHT spend some time on 3 local issues which is a start!

On the second page it becomes even more amusing!

Q: What Conservative commitments are the most important to you?

Make a success of Brexit”
(guessing the leaflet was planned some time ago!)

First one on the list is Not really a local issue, but the you would not think that the turmoil in Parliament and Brussels was anything like a “success”!

Q: “Cut the Deficit and deal with our country’s debts.”

This could be translated as: Do you approve of austerity and the selling off of public assets.

Again, not much of a local concern, except for the closing of local hospital beds, reduction in funding for all local services, no spending on our local infrastructure but the Government spending billions on HS2 to connect London and Birmingham and Cross Rail connecting one part of London to the other!

Q:“Continue to increase housebuilding and support home ownership”.

East Devon is already building more than 950 new houses per year, but the Tories want more and more! What local people want is “the right houses, built to the right quality, in the right place, at the right time”. Not what we are getting which are large, expensive housing estates that look like “everywhere land!”.

Q: Cut income tax by raising personal allowances.

If you earn enough to pay tax that’s fine, but the less well off become even further left in crisis with the cutting of social services! And what about all those billionaire donors – some paying no tax in this country at all!

Q: Ensure that pensions continue to rise annually.

Anything to keep pensions in line with inflation is good but reducing public services for the elderly affects their quality of life! And “rising annually” is no good if increases are below the cost of living and savings earn nothing and then go to fund home or nursing home care.

Q: Ensure the welfare and benefit system is fair and rewards work.

Just one comment here “Universal Credit! It’s NOT working!

Q: Continue to increase NHS spending.

Local NHS spending has been and is being cut and all our services at breaking point! Nine hours for an ambulance to turn up for a pensioner with a broken hip in Exmouth! And a CCG that has said it will cut HALF A BILLION pounds more in the next few years.

Q: Control and reduce immigration.

They cannot control migration if they cannot sort out a Brexit deal! And SOME immigration (such as health care workers) is urgently needed. And they have already confessed that immigration will now come from India and the Phillipines rather than the EU!

Q: Protect spending on schools.

Only this week our largest secondary school in the district asked parents to contribute to the funding! And academy schools pay their heads and directors hundreds of thousands of pounds – and then often go bust!

Q: Invest our National Security and defence.

It is a known fact that we are spending less on our armed forces and the police. These cuts can be seen with less police on our streets, crime seemingly increasing and less arrests and weaker sentences for those that are apprehended!

This is Our governing Political Party and our governing East Devon councillors asking these ridiculous questions!

You are asked to tick which 2 are important to you! Again, most people would say they are all important!!

You are then asked what party you voted for last time and which party you may consider voting for this time around, and finally asking you if you want to help or even join the Conservative Party! Remember, all this data on you is kept for later use (or sale).

What’s the alternative?

This questionnaire graphically demonstrates how out of touch this national and local political party is!!

Don’t reply to add to their already large database on you but elect a local INDEPENDENT candidate, already in touch with the electorate and already fighting on your behalf!

[Ottery] “Hospital faces 18 month wait to apply for community status”

“East Devon District Council (EDDC) announced on February 27 that supporters must wait until February 2020 before re-applying for the hospital to be listed as an asset of community value (ACV). When a building is listed as an ACV, the local community has to be informed if it goes up for sale and the public can enact the ‘community right to bid’ which gives them a period of six months to determine if they can raise the finance to purchase the asset.

The initial decision not to list the building as an ACV came in December when Ottery was one of four East Devon hospitals to be nominated. EDDC stated that it did not believe the hospital furthered the social wellbeing or social interests of the local community.

At the council meeting on February 27, Cllr Roger Giles, who also sits on the Ottery Town Council, raised the matter and referenced Southwold Hospital, in Suffolk, which was successfully listed as an ACV, before becoming the first hospital in the country to be bought by the community.

As part of the decision to list it as an ACV, Cllr Giles said the strategic director of WDC stated the owner’s assertion there is no evidence of the community social wellbeing being furthered defied common sense.

Cllr Giles said this is a view shared by many local Ottery residents about their hospital and warned that Ottery and other local community hospitals are at risk because of this perverse decision. He said EDDC is suffering reputational damage as a result of this ‘very regrettable’ decision.

Cllr Ian Thomas, leader of EDDC, said each case is considered on its merits and there had been no new evidence to warrant a review for Ottery.

Last week, leading figures from the Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital and the Northern, Eastern and Western Locality Devon Clinical Commissioning Group attended a discussion to review plans for the building. A statement from the working group said: “A wide-ranging and constructive discussion took place, and a number of tasks were allocated.”

A further meeting will be held in early June.”

https://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/ottery-hospital-wait-1-5930495

“DEPRIVED TOWNS FUND IS INSIGNIFICANT COMPARED WITH STAGGERING CUTS”

You read here that EDDC Conservatives have decided that the only town they will put forward for this (meagre)fund is Axminster. Well, good luck, Axminster!

But when voting day comes remember your councillors have alteady overspent around £3 million on their new HQ and are funding a new road at the airport for another £3 million AND setting up a £20 million property company to invest OUTSIDE East Devon.

“The Stronger Towns Fund, announced by the government yesterday, is a £1.6 billion fund to be spent between now and 2025 on places that are often referred to as ​‘left behind’.

£1.6 billion as a lump sum is not to be sniffed at, even though in government spending terms it’s relatively small beer. Share small beer out over seven years and it’s reduced to a thimble full; around £267 million total per year if spending starts in the financial year 2019/​20 and is distributed evenly until 2025/​26. Share it out further to all the places in the UK that most need government investment, training and jobs and it’s a droplet in the ocean.

If that were the beginning and end of it, then fine. ​‘Government announces small bit of funding for something that needs a bigger bit of funding’ is not much of a story. However, the government is giving with one hand, and taking much more away with the other.

The Revenue Support Grant is given to local authorities by central government and makes up around a third of councils’ budgets. Between 2018/​19 and 2019/​20, the grant is due to be cut by 37% — that’s £1.3 billion in a single year — on top of savage cuts to it that have already taken place.

From 2013/​14 to 2019/​20, even with locally retained business rates and the main government unrestricted grant, local authorities have seen their net incomes decrease by 48%. The year of Stronger Towns Funding that will presumably occur in 2019/​20 (if allocated equally over six years) compensates this loss by less than 1%. Council incomes will still have been cut by 47%. The whole Stronger Towns pot of money would reduce this loss by no more than 5% if provided in one year — which will not be the case. Of course, some regions will receive more than this and others less, but compared to the staggering cuts to local authorities, the new fund pales in comparison.

Aside from this loss of government money, post-Brexit the UK will be losing money provided by the European Union via its structural funds. Between 2014 and 2020, the UK will have received €17.2 billion for regional and social development, which has flowed significantly to many of the same areas that the Stronger Towns Fund will prioritise.

If the UK were to remain in the EU, between 2021 and 2027, €13 billion of EU structural funds would flow to poorer regions; significantly more than the Stronger Towns Fund. Some further settlement is expected from central government to compensate areas for this loss, but the amount is still unclear.

The Stronger Towns Fund has not gone down well in many of the regions, smaller cities and towns at which it will be targeted. And why should it? One cause of the economic malaise many of these places face is austerity. Reversing its effect will take more than this paltry offer. It will take a transformational approach to government investment, focused both on rebalancing the economy and restoring basic public services that are often the lifeblood of communities.

Many, including opposition politicians, have suggested that the Stronger Towns Fund looks like a bribe to persuade Labour MPs in leave-voting constituencies in particular to support the government’s Withdrawal Agreement. If so, the chances are it will have the opposite effect. …”

https://neweconomics.org/2019/03/deprived-towns-fund-is-insignificant-compared-with-staggering-cuts

More on Dominic Raab – apparently Swire’s choice for PM

Copied from a comnent on an earlier post:

Strange, isn’t it?

When he was housing minister, he did indeed claim that “migration pushed up house prices” – a claim which was later dismissed:
https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-43753564

One wonders, then, to what extent the migration of his father from Czechoslovakia “pushed up house prices”…

It was between 1938 and 1939 when “the British Schindler” evacuated hundreds of Jewish children from Prague:
https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/588091/Nicholas-Winton-saved-children-Nazis-dies-106

And as part of this “Kindertransport”, it was one of these children who was the father of the former Brexit minister:
https://www.timesofisrael.com/dominic-raab-karate-kid-with-a-jewish-father-in-the-brexit-hotseat/
https://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/brexit-secretary-dominic-raab-jewish-refugee-1.466795

The “frontrunner to be PM” is in fact very proud of his roots and his “determination to fight racism”:
https://jewishnews.timesofisrael.com/brexit-son-of-czech-jew-dominic-raab-frontrunner-to-be-pm-if-may-ousted/

But, then Raab is not the first politician of foreign extraction who would limit foreigners’ entry:
https://www.history.com/news/donald-trump-father-mother-ancestry
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world-0/donald-trump-immigration-rule-germany-grandfather-visa-english-language-skills-stephen-miller-jim-a7876121.html

“It’s those whose families have arrived … within the last generation or two who are often the keenest to slam the door shut on those coming today.”
View at Medium.com

What is even stranger still is that Dominic Raab’s wife is also not British-born:
https://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/surrey-news/surrey-mp-who-czech-refugee-11424826

But, then, “Some of my best friends are foreigners”:
https://societystuffblog.wordpress.com/2016/06/24/so-brexit-lads-what-its-not-us-its-you/

EDDC Conservative councillor defects to Lib Dems

Shame it wasn’t to East Devon Alliance but better than nothing:

https://www.devonlive.com/news/exmouth-tory-quits-party-lib-2622575

“Tory MP complains that Government isn’t giving Brexit bribes to South West MPs – because the region voted Conservative!”

From the blog of Independent DCC Councillor Martin Shaw, East Devon Alliance:

“The Government has announced its bribes to towns in order to persuade MPs, mainly Labour, to vote for its miserable Brexit deal.

Although it claims to have used a “need-based formula,” the South West is to receive the second-lowest allocation of cash (£33 million) despite being among England’s most deprived regions.

Coincidentally, it also has very few Labour MPs — and Sheryll Murray, the Tory MP for South East Cornwall, appears to have spotted the discrepancy.

“The fact this money appears to be directly routed to Labour-voting areas smacks of pork-barrel politics, and the public will know that,” Murray complains to The Times.

“It would be a crying shame if Conservative-voting communities were being disadvantaged because of the way they voted.”

Tory MP complains that Government isn’t giving Brexit bribes to South West MPs – because the region voted Conservative!

“Demand made for more police in East Devon after council tax hike”

Owl cannot understand how East Devon Tory councillors, who have voted time and time again for austerity, who have preened themselves for having one of the lowest council tax rates in the country, and instituted savage cuts can act surprised when they get less for more!

And don’t forget every time there is a vote in Parliament to cut anything – our two MPs vote for those same cuts – unless they affect their salaries or tax breaks for the rich or farming, of course in which case they fight tooth and nail for them!

“Give us more police’, East Devon councillors have demanded, to help tackle increasing incidents of disorder in the region.

Wednesday night’s full council meeting saw councillors agreed to write to the Chief Constable for Devon and Cornwall Police to recognise the needs of East Devon when deciding how to allocate extra resources after the council tax rise will enable 85 new officers to be recruited.

Councillors demanded that extra police be provided to the region, particularly in light of the number of PCSOs being cut from the current 196 to 150.

It comes after the Police and Crime Panel chose not to exercise their veto on Alison Hernandez’s proposals that would see council tax rise for £24 a year for the average Band D council tax payer.

Cllr Tom Wright, who proposed the motion, said that over the last two years, the increase on tax payers is 20 per cent, so residents should expect to see a significant improvement in the service.

“As East Devon residents are the biggest contributors to the police budget in Devon, other than Plymouth, it is only fair that we should get a fair share of the larger cake.

“The increase for this year that the police are getting from us is an extra £1.5m and for that we should get more police on the streets.”

Cllr Alan Dent added: “PCSOs can nip in the bud problems that can arise.”

He gave the example of a problem of people coming from North Devon to Budleigh Salterton to do wheelies in the car park.

Cllr Dent said: “They were zooming around across the car park. I got cross and took pictures of them. They gave me an earful, but I gave the pictures to our PCSOS, and in 24 hours it was dealt with and we never saw them again.”

He said that there was another incident where garden furniture was stolen from a show house. Cllr Dent again took photographs of the perpetrators, gave them to the PCSO, who said ‘I know who they are and will have a word with their parents.’

“That is the value of PCSOs and why we need them in the community,” he added.

Cllr Brian Bailey said that PCSOs stop people going down into the depth of drink and drugs. He added: “Extra funding mean officers can go into schools and educate people and get them on the right track.”

He said that there was another incident where garden furniture was stolen from a show house. Cllr Dent again took photographs of the perpetrators, gave them to the PCSO, who said ‘I know who they are and will have a word with their parents.’

“That is the value of PCSOs and why we need them in the community,” he added.

Cllr Brian Bailey said that PCSOs stop people going down into the depth of drink and drugs. He added: “Extra funding mean officers can go into schools and educate people and get them on the right track.”

And Cllr Eileen Wragg said that extra police would help tackle the ‘proliferation in drug use in Exmouth which is harming our youngsters, and has even resulted in the death of some of them’.

The motion, calling for the chief constable to recognise the needs of East Devon when deciding how to allocate extra resources, received almost unanimous support from the council, with only Cllr Megan Armstrong abstaining.”

https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/demand-made-more-police-east-2599799

PROPERTY SPECULATION SAFEGUARDS REJECTED BY EDDC TORIES

Owl says: The safeguards proposed in the amendment below, which was rejected by the Conservative majority, appear to Owl to be entirely sensible, and a necessary check on an inherently risky strategy. Owl considers that the East Devon Tories is showing a reckless disregard for financial prudence, and for their stewardship of public money – OUR money.

Independent councillors at East Devon District Council tabled a Notice of Motion, to allow a full debate and vote, on EDDC`s highly controversial Commercial Investment Framework (CIF) at the council meeting on 27 February.

The CIF would allow EDDC to borrow £20 million to speculate in the property market. But the EDDC Chief Executive refused to allow the Notice of Motion to appear on the agenda paper for the full council meeting.

The Independents therefore had to resort to Plan B – and move an amendment to the Cabinet minutes.

At the council meeting on 27 February, Cllr Roger Giles (Ottery Town) moved an amendment to EDDC Cabinet minute 160 of 6 February. The amendment (BELOW) was to introduce safeguards to what he described as a high risk strategy; it was seconded by Ben Ingham (Woodbury).

The amendment was to add the following words:

“The Council recognises that property investment is a potentially high risk strategy, and therefore agrees that any such property acquisitions should only be undertaken after stringent financial assessment taking into account the following guidelines:

1. Any property purchases should be made within East Devon, to maximise local expertise in the property market, and to benefit the local economy;

2. A firm of Commercial Chartered Surveyors should be appointed to provide a full Valuation report and Schedule of Condition in respect of each property; a financial assessment should be provided by an appropriate Qualified Firm in respect of existing tenants; the said reports of any property purchase should be submitted to the full council for approval prior to purchase;

3. An annual report detailing purchase costs and all disbursements relating thereto shall be made to the full council”.

At the meeting, Independent Councillor Roger Giles said that the strategy:

* was not in accord with the council`s economic development strategy, because property could be purchased outside of East Devon;

* was high risk, and would massively increase the council`s indebtedness;

* would result in just 4 of the council`s 59 councillors being involved in major decisions;

* did not have public support – there was considerable public unease about the council strategy.

Other Independent councillors expressed concerns about the strategy, and spoke in support of the amendment.

At the conclusion of the debate, the Conservative majority on the council voted down the amendment, and decided to press on without the safeguards proposed.

“Revealed: Wife of former Vladimir Putin minister is major Tory party donor”

“The Conservative Party received hundreds of thousands from a woman with ties to the Russian president.

The Conservatives received almost £250,000 in donations last year from the wife of a former minister in Vladimir Putin’s government, new figures revealed. Lubov Chernukhin, whose ex-deputy finance minister husband Vladimir fell out with the Kremlin, is among the most generous donors to Tory coffers. She handed over £146,750 in November and December in addition to £100,000 earlier in the year.

The party also accepted £150,000 from Ann Said, whose Syrina-born husband, Wafic, is a former broker of arms deals with links to Bashar al-Assad’s regime.

Tory donors

The biggest gift to the Tories in the fourth quarter was £1.5 million from musical theatre producer John Gore, a regular donor to the party.

The Construction vehicle manufacturer JCB handed over £666,667, while the former Tory treasurer Michael Spencer’s IPGL donated £506,188.
The figures emerged in figures from the Electoral Commission covering the final three months of 2018.

Jon Trickett, the shadow Cabinet Office minister, said: “These figures reveal a party paid for by the rich and powerful, with apparent links to repressive regimes, tax avoiders and arms dealers.

“The influence of big money diminishes our democracy and reminds people that even if you have a vote, your voice will still be drowned out.”

A Conservative spokesperson said: “The Conservative Party does not accept foreign donations – as they are illegal. If a British citizen is able to vote in an election for a political party, they also have the democratic right to donate to a political party.

“All donations to the Conservative Party are received in good faith, after appropriate due diligence. Donations are properly and transparently declared to the Electoral Commission, published by them, and comply fully with the law.”

Party funding

In the final quarter of 2018, the Conservatives received far more in donations than other parties, taking in almost £7.4m, more than four times the amount collected by Labour.

Jeremy Corbyn’s party took in £1.6m in donations during the three months, including a £490,300 gift from the Unite union.

Labour’s income from donations was outstripped by the £2,131,978 it received from public funds, much of it taxpayer-funded “Short money” to help opposition parties fund their work in the Commons.

The Liberal Democrats received £950,272 in donations and £249,937 from the public purse.

The Scottish National Party received £15,240 in gifts from three donors and £197,772 from public funds.

Greens took in £73,870 in donations and £27,611 from public funds, while Plaid Cymru had one donation of £10,722 and £24,928 in public funds. The UK Independence Party received just £13,000 in donations.

Over the course of 2018 Conservatives took donations totalling more than £21m, compared with less than £7m for Labour and £2.8m for the Lib Dems.

https://inews.co.uk/news/politics/who-funds-conservative-party-donor-russia-vladimir-putin-link/

Trek to new EDDC HQ in the evening if you want to be a councillor …

Just one small point. If you don’t have a car and no buses are running in the early or late evening (as happens now) how do you get to Blackout House (sic) for this meeting (or any other meeting for that matter) from Exmouth, Axminster, Seaton, Colyton or any outlying villages? Only Cranbrook and Sidmouth are served by late (after 5 pm) direct buses, and a train journey would be horrendously expensive.

Why do the people have to go to the Election Officer in the evening? Why isn’t the Election Officer going to ALL the people daytime and evening(so far Owl has heard of only one other town meeting in Ottery St Mary)? And making all those meetings accessible to disabled people?

Anyone would think people other than those in the very well represented Tory Party were being discouraged from standing …

“Representatives from East Devon District Council (EDDC) will be available on Monday (March 4) to discuss what the role involves and how residents can put themselves forward for the election.

The East Devon district is divided into 32 electoral wards, represented by 59 councillors who are elected for four years.

The next election for parish, town and district council positions will take place on Thursday, May 2.

The drop in session on Monday will be held between 4pm and 7pm at East Devon District Council’s new headquarters at Blackdown House in Honiton.

In attendance will be the returning officer, deputy returning officer and electoral services manager. They will be able to discuss the process, as well as whether a prospective candidate is eligible to stand.

Nomination packs will be available on the evening.”

https://www.midweekherald.co.uk/news/drop-in-session-for-prospective-election-candidates-1-5910780

Exeter and Devon County Council debate climate change – EDDC CEO refuses to allow debate

Press release from Transition Exeter below. EDDC CEO Mark Williams has refused a similar request for debate from an independent councillor.

“Green Councillor Chris Musgrave is bringing a motion to Exeter City Council on Tuesday February 26th calling on it to

Declare a ‘Climate Emergency’;

Pledge to make the city of Exeter carbon neutral by 2030 or sooner, taking into account both production and consumption emissions;

Call on Westminster to provide the powers and resources to make the 2030 target possible;

Continue to work with partners across the city and region, including Devon County Council, to deliver this new goal through all relevant strategies and plans;

To support the motion letters to city councillors would be very welcome; and supporters plan to gather outside the Guildhall before the motion is heard, at 5 pm on 26th February.

Devon County Council will also discuss a similar motion on Thursday February 21st.

Our Facebook page shows the {minority of} councillors who have pledged to support the motion. https://www.facebook.com/transition.exeter/ .

Cabinet has recommended changing the motion to aim for 2050. This is not much of an emergency! Please to your county councillor asking them to support the motion with the original target date for being carbon neutral of 2030. They will not be able to do this with their present budget and powers but the motion would be a strong call to Westminster to make realistic action possible!

Find your county councillor here

https://democracy.devon.gov.uk/mgMemberIndex.aspx?bcr=1
The motion is here https://democracy.devon.gov.uk/mgAi.aspx?ID=17450

One (Tory) councillor nearly sabotaged a highways safety project in Otterton

Honestly, EDDC Tories will stop at nothing to try to stop Claire Wright …. even if they cut off their own noses to spite their faces!

EDDC Councillor Tom Wright thinks he knows better than Otterton residents. Perhaps residents angry at his intervention should ensure they DON’T tick HIS box in local elections on 2 May!

Blog of Claire Wright.

“Otterton Parish Council has agreed to part fund a 20mph limit through the village, at a packed and testy meeting last night.

[This is the road being discussed below]

The agreement was made, despite a Conservative councillor selected to stand for Otterton in the East Devon District Council May election suggesting repeatedly during the meeting that the 20mph limit was a waste of time.

This did not go down with residents who made it clear they disagreed with him.

The vast majority of the village of Otterton wants a 20mph limit. I have carried out a consultation, had a public meeting and made a case based on the policy requirements.

Also backing the proposal is the Otterton Primary School headteacher.

And the parish council wrote to Devon County Council highways officers last year to support the case.

I have worked towards this over the past year or so, but despite meeting virtually all the policy requirements, the scheme fell recently as there has not been a speed related death in the village. A traffic accident resulting in a death, yes. But not a speed related death.

This very silly rule will hopefully be overturned thanks to a new government report which a Devon County Council highways task group is currently working on. This very much emphasises a ‘can do’ approach to 20mph limits as they are beneficial in slowing traffic and

Despite having no jurisdiction over Otterton – neither a resident nor a councillor representing the village, EDDC Conservative, Tom Wright continued to pour cold water all over the plans for the revised speed limit and claimed it was a waste of money.

At one point he even accused me of blogging that I would fund the entire project myself.

I replied that this was never the intention, as the upper limit cost would use up half my entire locality budget!

I also said it was quite wrong for him to be trying to undermine my work and the wishes of the vast majority of residents of Otterton.

Nevertheless Cllr Tom Wright, backed up by two managers attending from Ladram Bay, attacked me several times for this.

The Ladram Bay managers were on the warpath because I had asked them to fund a third of the scheme, given that a significant proportion of traffic travels to Ladram Bay. Local traffic surveys have confirmed this.

Otterton Parish Council Chairman, John Fudge received a statement from Ladram Bay about an hour before last night’s meeting which he read out.

It has taken about six months for the company to produce a response following my initial approaches to them, which they ignored.

The parish council clearly had reservations about the cost and the implications on the precept so I increased my offer to half funding the scheme. This will be decided at a later date, assuming the scheme finally gets approval.

Here’s the letter:

Dear Otterton Parish

Regarding the proposed introduction of an 20mph speed limit and the request of Councillor Claire Wright for Ladram Bay to part fund.

All the present information leads to the ineffectiveness of such an initiative, during a meeting in 2018 that was held in Otterton, with the Parish Council and the Highways Authority, it was communicated by Highways that a 20mph scheme without any relevant traffic calming measures would have absolutely no effect on speed reduction. This is also backed up by the latest government research study (Nov 2018) that confirms “no significant safety outcome in terms of collisions or casualties have come following the implementation of a 20mph zone” Unfortunately no scheme can legislate against the mindless minority who unfortunately drive recklessly.

Should Devon County Council support and approve such a scheme, or come up with a different scheme with proven results, then we will certainly consider funding part of the project in conjunction with other businesses in Otterton, if approached by the Parish Council.

Please can it be noted that we, like many residents, are vexed that Councillor Claire Wright has reneged on her promise at the public meeting January 2018 to fund the scheme in it’s entirety.

Ladram Bay Holiday Park

Thank you to Otterton Parish Council for agreeing to contribute to the costs of the scheme, should it be approved. We now await the results of the Devon County Council taskgroup, which should report its findings back in the next few weeks.”

http://www.claire-wright.org/index.php/post/otterton_parish_council_agrees_to_part_fund_20mph_limit_at_ill_tempered_mee

Vote for (Tory) me and the kid gets it!

… Which well-known, long-serving Tory councillor was overheard suggesting to children at a youth club that a vote for him would be a vote for a skate park?

Presumably meaning votes by their parents – not even an EDDC Tory would be that thick? Er ….. moving on …

Naughty, naughty councillor – your card is marked …!

Guess which council is very picky where it (sort of) recruits new councillors?

Teignbridge District Council is actively promoting new councillor candidates via numerous events throughout the district.

When challenged, EDDC it seems is not – choosing instead to send CEO (and supposedly neutral civil servant) Mark Williams to selected events, only upon invitation. Like trueblue Budleigh Salterton.

It’s almost like they don’t want any new candidates signing up – thus allow the incumbents to romp back home without a contest thus maintaining (their trueblue) status quo…

Odd that …..

And maybe time to check that electoral roll again.

We don’t want to find ourselves with 6,000+ too few voters again do we, Mr Williams.

As Private Eye might say: Shom mistake shurely …