Category Archives: Economy

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

16 Jan 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Developers/ Development, Development Management Committee, Economy, EDDC, Skypark, Small and Medium businesses, Sustainability, Villages BUAB, Woodbury

EDDC councillor desperately tries to justify expansion of Greendale and Hill Barton – going against Village Built Up Area requirements

Owl says: what a lot of help Greendale and Hill Barton are getting from (some) EDDC councillors! Hurriedly arranged meetings, a desperate race to find loopholes to allow expansion and now this. Is it a personal comment? Well, an awful lot of “we” in there!!! And quoting 2012 consultant’s views in 2018 – astonishing! AND playing down their own industrial sites (too big for small businesses) – REALLY!

“Mike Allen comment to Inspector on Hill Barton and Greendale issues

(The Lead Councillor for Business and Employment in East Devon District Council (EDDC) and past Chair of the Local Plan Forum which developed the current EDDC Local Plan)

EDDC welcomes proposals for business investment and the creation of units for small and medium sized enterprises across the East Devon area subject to NPPF and Local Plan criteria.

We appreciate that cumulative development along the A3052 road corridor has the potential to negatively impact upon existing communities and infrastructure and the operations of existing businesses. The lack of objection from Highways England on a recent nearby planning application is significant Hill Barton (HB) and Greendale Business Park (GBP) are situated near recently approved (on appeal) Yeo Business Park. This determination is of direct material significance in considering further proposed development.

I will examine four main areas of consideration for Economic development in respect of this SPD for Business Parks:

1) It could be reasonably assumed that the Planning Inspector’s view that employment space proposals of a ‘relatively small-scale development that would provide jobs for local people’ would be applicable to the current plans for Business Parks in the area. It is similarly likely that this location would also be deemed a suitable location for small scale business units at appeal.

2) Greendale and Hill Barton Business Parks are larger scale and vitally important to the economic expansion of East Devon outside of the Science Park and Skypark areas.

3) The lack of residential neighbours means no loss of amenity.

4) There is clear demand for the facilities at Hill Barton and Greendale, without which business expansion would not be accommodated elsewhere. The medium quality, flexibility and appeal of the industrial storage space and units for larger growing businesses in the district is essential.

To be clear, we have no economic basis on which to challenge further development within the perimeters set in the Villages DPD.

5) EDDC’s Economic Development team have reviewed the Draft Villages Plan as well as the Sustainability Appraisal. Having also reviewed Strategy 27 and Policy E7 of the adopted Local Plan, in addition to material evidence in respect of employment land delivery below, I recommend that the Greendale (GD) and Hill Barton (HB) employment sites be removed from this Villages Development Plan.
Approval of this draft Villages DPD with GD and HB included will exacerbate the undersupply of employment premises we are already experiencing through non-delivery of our employment allocations in the adopted Local Plan.

The Council’s strategic drive is to prioritise the development of employment land in the west of the district. Any applicants are advised to examine the potential suitability of our Enterprise Zone sites (Inc. the Exeter Airport Business Park Expansion site; Cranbrook Town Centre; Skypark & Science Park), all of which benefit from infrastructure investment in excess of £25 million and include enhanced transport corridor infrastructure, rail stations and employment site infrastructure as well as being immediately adjacent to Exeter Airport and A30 and M5 junctions.

However, we are aware of some businesses feeding back a view that sites, such those examined above are aimed predominantly at the medium to large scale employers with scientific and professional or transport accommodation requirements in excess of 5,000 sq. ft. This can fail to meet the needs of many new and growing local medium sized manufacturing / B2 class businesses many of which would not be welcome in proximity to residential areas or on Science Parks.

In 2012 East Devon District Council Commissioned Professor Nigel Jump of Strategic Economics Ltd to carry out an independent assessment of the economic impact of the two strategic employment sites in East Devon. His conclusions were clear in that investment in these locations has unlocked valuable employment and economic growth in the district.

Moreover, these sites have the potential to make further economic net benefits (job creation, added GVA and inward investment) throughout challenging economic periods
to come. The report concludes that when social and environmental factors are considered, there remains a net positive impact of extended capacity at these sites which are yet to run their full course.

In light of this EDDC commissioned evidence, inclusion of Greendale and Hill Barton within the Villages DPD is unwarranted, contrary to the specialist advice we have commissioned and would cause demonstrable harm to the district.

These findings are echoed in 3 subsequent studies of demand for industrial and commercial space in East Devon which formed the overall economic element of the EDDC Local Plan which placed great weight on the sustainable balance of social, economic and environmental issues as the “Golden thread” which ran through the Local Plan and the NPPF

The proposals for the development of medium sized businesses of B2/B8 category fit well with a large number of B use premises enquires received by Economic Development in the last 2 years,

The filling out and redevelopment of Greendale and Hill Barton will complement the demand for larger B use provision and remain a welcome addition to the diverse mix of commercial accommodation required to facilitate indigenous business growth as well as the district’s ability to meet the needs of potential inward investors seeking to become established or grow their operations in East Devon.

Having recently reviewed B use premises demand across the district, the following updates can be cited: –

In Exmouth, B use accommodation at Liverton Business Park is in high demand. We have seen speculative build in this location with all but their final unit now let. They are unable to accommodate further demand

Across Clinton Devon Estate’s whole East Devon portfolio of commercial property; they have no other vacant B use premises available, representing a significant shortage of supply.

The Exeter and Heart of Devon Commercial Premises Register has received 43 separate enquiries for B1 Office accommodation in the District in the last 3 months

Greendale have received more than 80 B use premises enquiries in the last 12 months totalling more than 850,000 sq. ft.

Also, west of the Enterprise Zone, land is being brought forward for speculative development of small, flexible B use units.

Recently, as part of their Business Plan for the use of the Owen Building, Rolle Exmouth Ltd provided details of 59 separate businesses, social enterprises, individuals, groups/classes, education & training providers who have declared an interest in finding small SME commercial premises in Exmouth
Lastly, to curtail the provision of good jobs at Hill Barton and Greendale would be to consciously, selectively and actively undermine our stated (and adopted) Local Plan ambition of delivering one job per new dwelling. This target has not yet been realised, resulting in an unsustainable imbalance between the provision of new homes and new, quality jobs in East Devon.

We cannot continue to overlook this imbalance as our young teens and twenties leave to pursue careers elsewhere and the economically inactive grow as a proportion of our aging population.

We continue to receive inward investment enquires of differing scales and different employment use classes, including from the Dept. for International Trade (DIT, formerly UKTI).

These request a diverse mix of investment formats and much needed employment opportunities from outside the district. However, it is often difficult to identify suitable available employment premises.

Maintaining a diverse mix of development land and premises is key to securing these investments and associated local economic benefit.

The increased density of employment possible on Greendale and Hill Barton sites for B1/B2/B8 use is a clear benefit to our established local supply chains and producers/providers served by these developments.

Finally – I am concerned about an issue of prejudice: I believe that it would be prejudicial to the economic development of East Devon to consider the imposition of Strategy 7 (Greenfield) on Hill Barton on Greendale since the sites are clearly well used industrial sites which are in the right location for the type of businesses they serve.

The two sites have been afforded a specific exception in Policy E7 – ‘Extensions to
Existing Employment Sites’ of our adopted Local Plan (See Pg. 196 “This policy will not apply at Hill Barton and Greendale business Parks”). While for landscape and other reasons we might wish to limit the further expansion of the sites, I believe it would be prejudicial to single out these two sites rather than the 50 other smaller industrial sites for special treatment.

The criteria already laid down within the Local Plan are fully sufficient to control and promote the appropriate development on these sites.

Recommendation

I recommend that the Greendale (GBP) and Hill Barton (HB) employment sites be removed from this Villages Development Plan. I recommend that any application of strategy 7 within the perimeters already agreed should not occur but that other Planning Policies on Industrial Land development should be applied on the basis of equity and equality with other industrial sites in East Devon.

Approval of this draft Villages DPD with GD and HB included and subject to strategy 7 will exacerbate the undersupply of employment premises we are already experiencing through non-delivery of our employment allocations in the adopted Local Plan.”

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

15 Jan 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Conflict of interest, Economy, Scrutiny, Sleaze

Is it the Conservatives we are supposed to trust with business?

“[John Manzoni the civil service chief executive]said [to the Public Accounts Committee] that it was not until November that officials “really started to notice” the problems at Carillion, whose chairman, Philip Green, is an adviser to the prime minister on corporate responsibility.

Between July and November, Carillion issued three major profits warnings and its shares crashed by 91%.”

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/jan/15/carillion-fallout-deepens-as-workers-face-pay-being-stopped-in-48-hours

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

9 Jan 2018

Posted under

Coastal communities, Economy, Exmouth, Tourism

Exmouth Royal Beacon Hotel in administration

“THE company behind one of Torbay’s best-known hotels has gone into administration. But company boss Keith Richardson said all the hotels remained open and it was ‘business as usual’. …

… The companies operate a collection of five hotels including the Grand Hotel in Torquay, The Royal Beacon Hotel in Exmouth, The Falmouth Hotel in Falmouth, The Fowey Hotel in Fowey and The Metropole Hotel in Padstow.

All have either three or four stars and are notable for their prominent seaside locations, period architecture and award-winning dining.

All five hotels will continue to trade on a business as usual basis while the administrators assess the current financial position and available options. …”

http://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/top-devon-hotels-administration-boss-1033893

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

21 Dec 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Accountable Care Organisation, Austerity cuts, Economy, Health and Social Care (local), Inequality, NHS (local), Privatisation

The price of Tory policies: tax and VAT rises and privatising NHS says IMF

Interesting that the IMF says that another £20 billion of spending cuts will be needed. That’s roughly how much Hunt wants to cut spending on the NHS.

The long game of 100% privatising the NHS – bringing with it rationing, post code lotteries and American-style health care approaches, appears to be nearing its conclusion.

As regards harmonising VAT at its higher rate – currently 20% – this would mean a 15% VAT increase on heating costs, all food and drink, charitable fundraising, equipment for disabled people, water, materials to insulate homes, boilers, children’s clothes …. the full list is here:

https://www.gov.uk/guidance/rates-of-vat-on-different-goods-and-services

“Taxes will have to rise if the government is to balance the books by the middle of the next decade and the NHS may have to be privatised, the International Monetary Fund has warned.

Property taxes, the removal of preferential VAT rates for goods such as pasties, and higher national insurance contributions by the self-employed need to be considered if Britain is to have any chance of eliminating its budget deficit by 2025 because spending cuts have gone about as far as they can, the global economic watchdog said in its annual review of the UK.

Weak productivity and the increasing care demands of an ageing population will make deficit reduction harder. Public services such as the NHS may have to be scaled back or privatised, it added.

The warnings are a reminder of the persistent problem of Britain’s public finances almost a decade after the financial crisis caused borrowing to soar. National debt is 87 per cent of GDP and spending on public services exceeds revenue from taxes by more than 2 per cent of GDP.

“Continued deficit reduction is critical to create further room to respond to future shocks,” Christine Lagarde, managing director of the IMF, said. “There is not much space for additional spending cuts and the revenue side of the equation has to be looked at.”

Britain is already forecast to be paying 34.3 per cent of GDP in tax by 2022, more than at any time since the 1950s, but economists estimate that at least £20 billion of extra austerity will be needed to hit the government’s target of balancing the books.

Ms Lagarde said population changes were adding to the problem. “Population ageing is expected to lead to material increases in spending on healthcare, pensions and long-term care, while productivity growth has been slow. And a slowly growing economy means fewer resources will be available to meet increased spending,” she said.

The public spending burden will soon make Britain face some hard choices, the IMF added. “The UK may face difficult decisions about the desired size of its public sector, as well as the mode of delivery and financing of public services. Brexit-related effects may exacerbate the challenge.”

To address the problem, Britain needs to boost productivity. Ms Lagarde welcomed the chancellor’s £31 billion fund for infrastructure investment and focus on technical qualifications because “the UK underinvests in infrastructure and falls short in human capital development”. But she said that more needed to be done “such as easing planning restrictions and reforming property taxes to boost housing supply”.

As well as introducing a land tax, the government should harmonise VAT for goods that get preferential rates and better “align the tax treatment of employees and the self-employed”. Both proposals have proved a poisoned chalice for chancellors. George Osborne tried to harmonise VAT rates for hot food in his “omnishambles budget” and Philip Hammond had to backtrack this year on raising national insurance for the self-employed. The IMF also recommended “reducing the tax code’s bias towards debt” and scrapping the triple lock on state pensions.

John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor, said: “The IMF has played the role of the ghosts of Christmas past, present and future to remind the chancellor that seven years of Tory failure is undermining our economy.”

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

14 Dec 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Economy, Inequality

“World’s richest 0.1% have boosted their wealth by as much as [all the] poorest half

“The richest 0.1% of the world’s population have increased their combined wealth by as much as the poorest 50% – or 3.8 billion people – since 1980, according to a report detailing the widening gap between the very rich and poor.

The World Inequality Report, published on Thursday by French economist Thomas Piketty, warned that inequality had ballooned to “extreme levels” in some countries and said the problem would only get worse unless governments took coordinated action to increase taxes and prevent tax avoidance. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/inequality/2017/dec/14/world-richest-increased-wealth-same-amount-as-poorest-half

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

4 Dec 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Economy, Hinkley C, Local Enterprise Partnership, Scrutiny, Somerset

Hinkley C gets its own posh hotel thanks to OUR LEP

Anyone know of any hotel that got LEP funding in Devon? Seaton, Honiton Premier Inns perhaps? Certainly not!

From an LEP report:

“In October Deepak Chainrai of DC Hotels (Bridgwater) Ltd welcomed representatives from HotSW LEP, Bridgwater Town Council and Sedgemoor District Council to the site of the new Mercure Bridgwater Hotel, which is visibly taking shape, as an opportunity for all to see the work and progress behind the construction hoarding.

Before touring all five floors, the group was shown around the lobby area, meeting rooms, lounge and bar, leading to the destination restaurant that will be operated by The Marco Pierre White Steakhouse Bar & Grill.

The new hotel was partly financed by a loan from the LEP’s Growing Places Fund, which aims to get projects off the ground that would otherwise not be immediately served by the commercial marketplace. The site is strategically placed as an asset for the area with the development of the nearby Hinkley Point C. The establishment of a modern hotel with an international restaurant chain and commercial units is an important amenity that will boost the local economy and generate new jobs.”

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

4 Dec 2017

Posted under

Economy, Local Enterprise Partnership

HOTSW Growth Strategy: stymied by exodus of young from small towns

Devon: 47 towns, 2 cities (Exeter and Plymouth)
Somerset: 29 towns, no cities

http://www.ft.com
2 mins read:

“The emptying out of young people from Britain’s small towns has accelerated over the past two decades, as the gap widens between the country’s cities and university towns and everywhere else.

New research shows that, since 1981, Britain’s towns and villages have lost more than a million people aged under 25, while gaining more than 2m over-65s.

By contrast, main cities have seen net inflows of more than 300,000 under-25s and net outflows of 200,000 over-65s.

Centre for Towns, a new think-tank set up to draw attention to the plight of smaller communities, whose millions of residents are frequently ignored in policy debates, said the trend has accelerated sharply since the millenium.

In 1981, the proportion of over-65s was similar across communities of all sizes, ranging from a low of 23 over-65s for every 100 working-age residents to a high of 26.3 in villages.

By 2001, the signs of demographic sorting had begun to emerge, with an old-age ratio of 22.5 in large cities, and 29.1 in villages; in 2011, there were 35.6 over-65s for every 100 people of working age in Britain’s villages — double the figure of 19 in large cities.

The changing demographics of small towns have seen their labour markets become less dynamic, while a growing elderly population puts strains on health and social care.

The divide was evident in the voting for the 2016 EU referendum. Centre for Towns calculated what share of the vote went to Leave and Remain in different sizes and types of towns and cities, and a clear gradient runs through from the large cities, university towns and commuter towns which delivered the strongest Remain votes, to smaller towns — especially those still suffering from post-industrial decline, and stagnating coastal towns such as Blackpool.

New polling carried out by Centre for Towns also provides a quantitative measure of the quality of life being left behind. Britain’s town-dwellers feel more socially, economically and politically peripheral than those who live in cities, and are more pessimistic about whether their areas’ fortunes will be reversed soon.

Among town-dwellers, 69 per cent feel their towns are being left-behind, believing the area they live in is less central to British society than other areas. Similarly, 68 per cent believe politicians do not care about their town. In cities, the corresponding figures are much lower, at 56 and 54 per cent.

A similar gap is evident in perceptions of communities’ economic strength. Of town-dwellers, 53 per cent feel their area is less well-off than other parts of the country, compared to just 36 per cent in cities.”

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

4 Dec 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, DCC, Economy, Local Enterprise Partnership, Martin Shaw (Seaton), Scrutiny

Comments

2 Comments

DCC Corporate Infrastructure and Regulatory Services Scrutiny Committee savages HOTSW Growth Strategy

NOW THAT’S HOW YOU DO SCRUTINY!
(Thanks to Independent East Devon Alliance DCC Councillor Martin Shaw for bringing to the committee 10 of the 11 points and Budleigh resident David Daniel for his succinct 3 minute take-down of the original document)
at:
https://eastdevonwatch.org/2017/11/30/watch-eda-councillor-shaw-and-budleigh-resident-david-daniel-make-most-sense-on-lep-strategy/

Heart of the South West Joint Committee and Draft Productivity Strategy (Cabinet Minute 77/8 November 2017)

Minute 31:

“The Committee received the Joint Report of the Head of Economy, Enterprise and Skills and the Head of Organisational Development (EES/17/5) providing information on the Heart of the South West Joint Committee and the draft Productivity Strategy, which was currently being consulted on and which highlighted a number of challenges facing the Heart of the South West area.

The consultation period had been extended to 14 December 2017 and an Action Plan would be shared with the Committee at a future meeting.

RESOLVED that

the Committee note the work to develop a Joint Committee and that, to enable a bid for devolved powers and funds to be successful, revisions were suggested to be made to the Heart of the South West Productivity Strategy, taking the following comments into account, namely:-

(a) the ambition to double the size of the economy in 18 years, involving an annual growth rate of 3.94%, was unrealistic given that the regional annual rate over the last 18 years had been 1.5% and the national growth rate, which had not exceeded 3% in a single year during that period, was now forecast to average less than 1.5% per annum in the next five years;

(b) the early ambitious aim of moving from less than average to above average productivity was not credible since the Strategy lacked the wide range of specific proposals needed to raise productivity across the board and contained little detail on how gaps in higher skills level would be filled;

(c) the Strategy did not adequately address the obstacles to higher than average productivity in sectors with endemic low pay and casual working, like social care and hospitality, which were disproportionately represented in the local economy, by our older than average population, and by under-employment;

(d) the Strategy said little about rural Devon and needed to include the key recommendations of the South West Rural Productivity Commission;

(e) the Strategy did not emphasise sufficiently the shortfall in broadband provision and the radical investment needed if Devon were not to fall further behind other regions;

(f) the Strategy did not provide details of the opportunities of Brexit, which it mentioned, nor did it take account of risks such as a decline in investment due to uncertainty, issues for firms exporting to Europe if the UK was not part of a customs union, and threats to the knowledge element of our economy due to universities losing EU staff and research opportunities;

(g) the Strategy needed to show how Devon would respond to automation and Artificial Intelligence;

(h) the Strategy needed to indicate clear performance indicators through which success could be measured;

(i) the Strategy needed to align more explicitly with the Government’s new Industrial Strategy and ‘Sector deals’ which may provide funding;

(j) the Strategy needed to explain what kind of devolution would help meet aspirations and articulate clear, realistic selling points and questions of Government; and

(k) the Strategy needed to include proposals to bring forward all forms of transport, including rail, which improved accessibility to the Peninsular.”

http://democracy.devon.gov.uk/documents/g2578/Printed%20minutes%2028th-Nov-2017%2014.15%20Corporate%20Infrastructure%20and%20Regulatory%20Services%20Scrutiny%20Comm.pdf?T=1

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

30 Nov 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Economy, Inequality

Budget favours men

“Jeremy Corbyn is leading a cross-party effort to force ministers to publish details of the impact of their policies broken down by gender, race, age, disability, class and region, after analysis showed women continue to bear the brunt of austerity.

The Labour leader has signed a letter with 126 other MPs, including members of his own party, the Lib Dems, SNP and Greens, calling for an immediate equality assessment of all government policies.

The letter to the education secretary, Justine Greening, whose brief covers equalities, accuses the government of failing in its duty to sufficiently consider the impact of its actions on all groups in society.

Labour said its analysis showed that men received 46% more spending in Philip Hammond’s autumn budget.

A financial model developed by Yvette Cooper, a senior Labour backbencher, and House of Commons library statisticians found that 86% of savings to the Treasury from tax and benefit changes since 2010 had come from women.

Labour said the latest budget did nothing to change that, meaning women had been hit six times harder by austerity measures than men since the Conservatives came to power in 2010.

The letter, co-signed by Corbyn, Dawn Butler, the shadow equalities secretary, Jo Swinson, the deputy Lib Dem leader, Angela Crawley, the SNP spokeswoman on equalities, and Caroline Lucas, the co-leader of the Greens, said: “If the government continues in this manner there can be no public confidence that the public sector equality duty is being fulfilled.

“We are calling on the government to undertake and publish a comprehensive cumulative equality impact assessment of all government policies. This assessment must include analysis of the impact of all its policies in relation to gender, race, age, disability, class and region. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/nov/30/labour-leads-drive-for-equality-impact-assessment-of-tory-policies

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

30 Nov 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, DCC, Economy, Local Enterprise Partnership, Martin Shaw (Seaton), Scrutiny

Comments

2 Comments

Watch EDA councillor Shaw and Budleigh resident David Daniel make most sense on LEP “strategy”

Jump to 2 hours into the meeting to see these two local people talk total sense to a bunch of mostly Tory councillors most of whom seem to understand beggar-all about why they are there!

Mr Daniel – a former government strategic analyst is at around 15 minutes into the meeting and speaks persuasively about why the Heart of the South West LEP strategy is totally unachievable. Independent East Devon Alliance DCC Councillor Martin Shaw (whose forensic report was totally accepted with one additional point added) is at around 2 hours into the meeting speaking on why the report before the councillors is style over substance and dangerous to go along with in its current form.

In Owl’s opinion, they run rings around the rest of the committee!

Although one councillor did make a point (Owl is paraphrasing here!} that this is an 18 year “strategy” and could well be redundant in a few years – when some other crazy idea might replace it!

https://devoncc.public-i.tv/core/portal/webcast_interactive/303464

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

29 Nov 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Economy, Privatisation, Transport (local)

Who benefits from rail changes?

Deutsche Bahn (Germany),  SNCF and Govia (France), Abellio (Netherlands), Renfe (Spain),  First MTR (part-owned Hong Kong), Trenitalia (Italy):

 

 

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

29 Nov 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Economy, Transport (local)

Comments

3 Comments

“Tories accused of trying to quietly re-privatise Britain’s rail infrastructure” (including south west)

The plan is for Great Western Railways to be split into two:

“The plans would create a new West of England rail franchise to provide long-distance services between London, Wiltshire, Somerset, Devon and Cornwall together with local and regional services across the south-west.”

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/the-future-of-the-great-western-franchise

“Transport secretary Chris Grayling says the government wants to break up the troubled [Great Western] Thameslink, Southern and Great Northern franchise when the current contract comes to an end, and look into reopening lines closed during the notorious Beeching cuts of the 1960s.

But the proposals also include publicly-owned Network Rail sharing its responsibility for running the tracks with private train operators.

Britain’s rail network – the tracks, bridges and infrastructure – was taken into public ownership after a bungled experiment with privatisation left it close to collapse.

Railtrack, the privatised franchise, went bankrupt after being hit with the cost of repairs and compensation from the Hatfield rail crash in 2000. …

… Mr Grayling denied that the plans amounted to the splitting up and privatising of Network Rail.

He told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: “No, we’re not privatising Network Rail. Network Rail will remain in public ownership, but Network Rail is going to be devolved into a series of route businesses, it’s not going to be one big central blob, it’s going to be a series of locally-focused, or route-focused, operations around the country.”

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/tories-accused-trying-quietly-re-11606147

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

27 Nov 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Economy, Local Enterprise Partnership, Scrutiny, Spin, Transparency

More bad news for ineffective Local Enterprise Partnerships!

The Industrial Strategy is also offering what it calls “Sector Deals”. Partnerships between Government and groups of industries and businesses focussed on specific industrial sectors such as Nuclear Power.

To unlock Government money here are the sort of things Government will require (page 210):

“Deal proposals should have a demonstrable and analytically rigorous impact on the productivity and earning power of the sector.

We expect credible analysis of the impact of any proposals to accompany each specific proposal showing expected increase in GVA, employment or increases in skilled workers, exports or specific investments (including foreign direct investment) resulting from the deal. Tangible commitments are likely to be the most convincing.

Sector Deal proposals need to be realistic and achievable. We are looking for evidence that industry commitments can be delivered and that clear governance arrangements will be set up. Any arrangements should be proportionate to the scale of ambition of the deal itself and designed to ensure commitments will endure. To be credible, deal proposals should include specific delivery plans covering each component of the proposal.”

Click to access industrial-strategy-white-paper.pdf

Demonstrable and analytically rigorous impact on productivity; credible analysis; tangible commitments; realistic and achievable proposals; clear governance: specific delivery plans …

HotSW, our LEP, is going to have to up its game or we shall lose out on each and every one of these.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

27 Nov 2017

Posted under

Austerity cuts, Economy, Inequality, Local Enterprise Partnership, Transport (local)

Comments

1 Comment

“Devon and Cornwall shunted onto the slow track?”

Owl says: But, of course, there WILL be a railway to Hinkley C!

“Transport secretary Chris Grayling ready to break up railways

Transport secretary Chris Grayling is this week set to unveil a blueprint for overhauling the railways — including splitting two of the biggest routes.

It is part of a fightback against Labour’s popular policy of renationalisation.

His strategy is expected to advocate splitting the Great Western franchise, which runs from London to south Wales and the southwest.

The route could be split into an inter-city franchise and a separate Devon and Cornwall business.

The mammoth Thameslink, Southern and Great Northern franchise is also likely to be split, with the strike-hit Southern route between London and the south coast set to be carved out.

Grayling is also keen to reform state-backed Network Rail, which owns and maintains the 20,000 miles of track, 40,000 bridges and most of the big stations. He has advocated closer union between Network Rail and the private companies that operate routes to crack the problems of divided loyalties and poor co-ordination.

The strategy comes ahead of a huge increase in some rail fares from January, with the rise tied to July’s 3.6% retail prices index inflation rate.”

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/transport-secretary-chris-grayling-ready-to-break-up-railways-f9c8h38mk

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

27 Nov 2017

Posted under

Affordable and Social Housing, Austerity cuts, Developers/ Development, Economy, Inequality

Comments

1 Comment

“Property unaffordable for 100,000 households a year in England”

“Almost 100,000 households in England are being priced out of the property market each year because of a shortage of affordable homes to rent or buy, according to a report. …

… About 96,000 households are unable to afford homes at the market rate, either to buy or rent, Savills said, with the vast majority in London and the south. It said varying approaches were needed to address the shortfall in different parts of the country: low-cost rented homes were needed more in markets in which incomes were smaller, while a mixture of homes, including shared ownership, would help in more expensive areas.

In London, 20% of the households affected have incomes above £35,000, Savills said, while the same proportion earn less than £10,000.

Over the past three years, 55,000 fewer affordable homes have been built each year than were needed, the research found. Although 42,500 households in the capital required below market rate housing, only 8,800 affordable homes a year had been delivered. In the south outside London, 15,500 affordable homes a year were being built while 34,100 were needed.

Meanwhile, in the north of England, low incomes were locking out 9,600 households a year, with 8,900 homes being delivered.

A speech by the prime minister, Theresa May, at the Conservative party conference in October made a commitment of £2bn over four years to fund social housing. However, to house 100,000 emerging households over this period would need funding of £7bn a year, Savills said.

Paying for the new homes would reduce the housing benefit bill by £430m a year. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/nov/27/property-england-priced-out-households-affordable-homes-savills-report

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

24 Nov 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Affordable and Social Housing, Austerity cuts, Developers/ Development, Economy

“Housing policy risks ‘sting in the tail’ as new HRA freedoms combine with Right to Buy pilot”

“Councils received mixed messages on housing in the 2017 budget – with borrowing freedoms to help build more homes accompanied by a renewed threat of forced sales.

There was a cautious welcome for the chancellor Philip Hammond’s announcement that the government will increase the Housing Revenue Account borrowing cap for a limited number of councils.

However, there was concern that the government is pushing ahead with a pilot to test the idea of forcing councils to sell high value homes to fund an extension of Right to Buy (RTB) to housing association tenants….

… Paul Dossett, head of local government at accountancy firm Grant Thornton, said: “It looks like a very small pot in total when compared to other housing initiatives announced in the budget and in other recent government announcements.”

He also called on the government to clarify what the government meant by areas of high affordability pressure.

“In our view the cap should be lifted for all housing authorities so they can plan holistically across the country to build the social housing that we need,” he said. …

… The chancellor also announced plans to press ahead with a £200m pilot extending the Right to Buy for housing association tenants in the Midlands.

Councils had hoped that the idea, along with many housing policy initiatives from former chancellor George Osborne, had been shelved after a scheduled pilot scheme failed to materialise.

But documents released alongside the budget by the Office for Budget Responsibility, said: “A small pilot scheme was due to run from January to May 2016 but was delayed to July due to the process of applications taking longer than expected and there being a longer lag between issuing instructions to solicitors and completions being achieved.

“A larger pilot was announced in Autumn Statement 2016 and was due to begin in April 2017. This did not take place. It has instead been replaced by a new pilot announced at this budget, due to run for one year from July 2018.”

http://www.room151.co.uk/funding/housing-policy-risks-sting-in-the-tail-as-new-hra-freedoms-combine-with-right-to-buy-pilot/

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

23 Nov 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Economy, Local Enterprise Partnership

At least one person hasn’t had a stagnant wage!

Paul Diviani has helped at least one “hard working person” to beat the trend – Chris Garcia, CEO of our Local Enterprise Partnership who got a whacking 26% increase in his salary last year as reportd here:

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2017/01/17/17562/

and here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-somerset-38648435

and here:

http://www.yeovilexpress.co.uk/news/15035937.Somerset_County_Council_leader_hits_out_at_proposed_pay_rise_for_quango_chief/

Nice work if you can get it (unless of course you happen to have a university vice-chancellorship in your back pocket!).

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

23 Nov 2017

Posted under

Affordable and Social Housing, Austerity cuts, Developers/ Development, Economy

“Budget 2017: Hammond’s Stamp Duty Cut Backfires As Watchdog Warns It Will Push Up House Prices”

“No new homes guaranteed either despite £44bn claim.

Philip Hammond’s Budget bid to woo younger voters with stamp duty cuts unravelled within minutes after the UK’s economic watchdog warned the move would push up house prices.

The Chancellor was cheered by Tory MPs as he unveiled a surprise move to scrap stamp duty for first time buyers of homes worth less than £300,000 and Treasury officials claimed it would save a million people an average of £1,600.

But the independent Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) demolished the policy, declaring it would lead to a spike in house prices – and may only result in just 3,500 more people buying a home than otherwise.

Hammond’s wider claim to be spending £44bn on housing also came under fire as it emerged the actual new money was £15bn and not a single new home would be built as a direct result of the measures unveiled on Wednesday.

After the summer’s snap election disaster and weeks of Cabinet resignations and Brexit rows, Hammond tried to reconnect with voters with a £25bn spending package aimed at the cost of living, NHS underfunding and the housing crisis.

But his hopes of a political recovery were knocked back as:

* A new pledge of £3.7bn for Brexit preparations outstripped the £2.8bn promised in day-to-day spending for the NHS

* Growth forecasts were slashed, with claims that weaker pay will lower household income by £540 by 2023 and the national minimum wage going up slower than planned

* A promised pay rise for nurses was unspecific and delayed, with no other public sector workers given an penny extra

* Universal Credit wait times were cut by a week but not down to the month demanded by critics, with no halt in its roll-out nationwide

* Fast-tracked plans to sell off state shares in RBS bank to raise £15bn were described as “desperate”

Jeremy Corbyn attacked the Budget’s failure to provide the radical policies Britain needs and seized on the housing measures as more spin than substance.

“The government promised 200,000 starter homes three years ago and not a single one has been built. We need a large-scale public housebuilding programme, not this government’s accounting tricks and empty promises.”

The stamp duty change – which kicks in from midnight on Tuesday – won cheers from Tory MPs as it was the “rabbit in the hat” plucked out by Hammond to end his Budget speech with a final flourish.

Yet the OBR was swift with a savage take-down of the plan and the Resolution Foundation claimed that “it would be literally cheaper” to buy the tiny number of winners a house each.

In a withering verdict, the OBR said: “The main gainers from the policy are people who already own property, not the first time buyers themselves… It is also possible that non-first time buyers will abuse the relief.”

The stamp duty cut only applies to house sales over £120,000 and as a result won’t help many people outside the south east and in poorer parts of the country.

A Treasury spokesman insisted the stamp duty cut would make a difference to many. “We don’t think that £1,600 on average for a million people over the next five years is a small move at all,” he said.

The Treasury repeatedly refused to say if a single new home would be guaranteed as a result of the wider housing package, which includes loans and funds and incentives for developers rather than concrete spending for things like council homes.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/hammond-stamp-duty-cut-savaged-by-obr-watchdog-no-new-homes-either_uk_5a15b44ce4b025f8e933247c

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

22 Nov 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Economy, Local Enterprise Partnership

South West and our LEP snubbed in budget

Lots of “talking up” by LEP members tonight – but nothing to talk up except competitive access to general “funds” that rarely seem to materialise.

Not the brightest buttons in the budget box then …!

“The Westcountry has been snubbed in major funding pledges for the UK regions.

In his budget statement yesterday, Chancellor Philip Hammond gave special mention to the Northern Power House, Midlands Engine, and high speed rail HS2 with half of a £1.7bn transforming cities pots pledged to six elected metro mayor regions.

Tim Jones, chairman of the Devon and Cornwall Business Council, said: “We have been snubbed and I’m afraid to say it, but it’s the Cinderella South West yet again.” …

… Chris Garcia, Chief Executive of the HoSW LEP said that region is primed with potential to help create the “global Britain” that the Chancellor referred to in his speech.

“However, we were disappointed not to be name checked in the speech or the budget, and that the focus is very much on specific cities with particular emphasis on those that have opted for an elected Mayor.

“It’s our aim, along with our partners in business, the local authorities and the other south west LEPs, to demonstrate the immense contribution that can be delivered from our potentially thriving region: The Great South West – which can rival the economies of the Northern Powerhouse and Midlands Engine. We need to drive this message home to the front benches of Westminster and show the country what we’re worth.”

http://www.devonlive.com/news/business/how-westcountry-been-left-hanging-818747

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

22 Nov 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Conflict of interest, Economy, Hinkley C, Local Enterprise Partnership

Hinkley Point – the case against grows stronger – part 2

MOwl’s view: meanwhile, all those board members (and former board members) of our LEP with nuclear interests are very happy – those providing the roads to the site, those building houses near the site, those recruiting staff for the site, those building new facilities for site workers and extending their colleges and universities on the back of nuclear training courses they will run. It really doesn’t matter if it is a Somerset white elephant.

AND they are using OUR money for this.

”The government has saddled families with inflated household bills for decades because of the poor deal it negotiated over the Hinkley Point nuclear plant in Somerset, MPs have said.

The Public Accounts Committee (PAC) criticised a contract awarded to EDF to build the first new nuclear station in Britain since 1995 as too expensive, with the burden falling most heavily on poorer households.

Meg Hillier, the committee’s chairwoman, accused the government of “grave strategic errors” in crafting the deal, which will leave consumers paying £30 billion in subsidies over 35 years — five times more than expected.

“Bill-payers have been dealt a bad hand by the government in its approach to this project,” she said. “Its blinkered determination to agree the Hinkley deal, regardless of changing circumstances, means that for years to come energy consumers will face costs running to many times the original estimate.”

The government signed a preliminary deal in 2013 with EDF, the French state-owned nuclear generator, to pay a fixed price of £92.50 per megawatt hour for the electricity produced by the Hinkley station for 35 years, indexed to inflation. The costs are to be met via a levy on consumer bills once the station enters service, expected to add £10 to £15 a year to the average household bill.

But when wholesale energy prices plunged sharply in 2014, amid growing doubts over the French reactor technology earmarked for use at Hinkley, following delays and cost overruns at other plants, the government failed to revisit the terms.

The PAC accused ministers of pressing ahead and locking consumers into an expensive deal.

“The economics of nuclear power in the UK have deteriorated since the government last formally considered its strategic case for nuclear in 2008,” the report said. “Estimated construction costs have increased while alternative low-carbon technologies have become cheaper. At the same time, fossil-fuel price projections have fallen.”

A spokesperson for the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy said that it was a “competitive deal”.

EDF Energy said: “The cost of Hinkley Point C for customers has not changed and they will pay nothing for its reliable, low carbon electricity until the station is completed . . . Construction is fully under way and is already delivering a huge benefit to British jobs, skills and industrial strategy.”

Hannah Martin, head of energy at Greenpeace UK, said the PAC report showed that the government should revisit the project because it “makes absolutely no financial sense”.

Source: The Times (pay wall)