“Find out if your local councillor is being wined and dined”

Of course, the complication we have in East Devon is that several of our district councillors are, or have been, in the “hospitality trade” as Owl has pointed out in the past:

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2016/05/19/when-does-private-become-public-and-public-become-private-a-very-fine-line/

“The timeless practice of “gastronomic pimping”, as Nye Bevan put it, is a tool long used by commercial lobbyists to curry favour. These “meetings” are deliberately social occasions designed to create bonds, establish shared values and ultimately influence council decisions.

Robert Davis, the most wined and dined politician in Britain while he was chairman of Westminster council’s planning committee, was entertained 150 times by property industry figures in three years. But hospitality is not the only tool in the property lobbyist’s box. One of the surest ways to access and influence the officials you seek to influence is to employ people who know local government inside out. Councillors up and down the country are employed in the property lobbying business. They are elected to represent the public interest and at the same time employed by developers seeking to influence the public sphere.

Full list of Westminster councillor Robert Davis’s 514 freebies
Take one of the scores of firms in this business, which claims to have “won successful planning consents for over 20 years”. It employs numerous local councillors, including one who sits on a council planning committee, as well as prospective and former councillors, plus a former council leader. These people not only understand how decisions are made, but in many cases are the decision-makers themselves. This is valuable for any developer needing council backing.

Besides trying to ensure that elected officials are onside with their clients’ development plans, these planning lobbyists also deal with any resistance from local communities. Developers have a statutory duty on large projects to consult with communities. Consultation, however, in the hands of lobbyists, is a tool that serves to draw out community opposition and provide it with a managed channel through which to voice concerns, but with no hope of tangibly changing the outcome. As the ex-Tesco lobbyist Bernard Hughes explained: “Businesses have to be able to predict risk and gain intelligence on potential problems. The army used to call it reconnaissance; we call it consultation.”

What do developers want from their relationships? It may be straightforward planning permission; or relief from paying a tax used to fund local amenities; or an agreement with the council on the amount of affordable homes the developer has, or doesn’t have, to provide. All of which can be, and is, negotiated by the councils upon which such lavish hospitality is poured.

That the “local lobbying” industry has got away with such practices for so long is no surprise. It lacks the one thing necessary to drive them out – scrutiny. As Davis says in his defence, all his meetings with developers “were all properly declared and open to anyone to examine”. But people need to have a proper look at what is happening in their council. Take a look at the registers of interests to see if any of your councillors double up as lobbyists. Get hold of the registers of hospitality and see if they are taking from the developers they should be overseeing. Use freedom of information law to dig deeper into who is meeting whom, and what they are seeking to do, and then hand the information to your local paper.

Until a light is shone on these relationships they will continue to flourish, and we will continue to get developments that serve no one but the investors and developers.”

• Tamasin Cave is co-author of A Quiet Word and a campaigner with Spinwatch

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/feb/21/local-councillors-lobbying-entertainment

So, how is EDDC’s office relocation going? Update and some odd figures

With the new barn-like EDDC HQ taking shape in Honiton, how is the project going? How much has it cost so far? What is the current projected cost?

Hard to say. Owl searched for news of the “Office Relocation Project Executive Group” and was directed to its website:

http://eastdevon.gov.uk/council-and-democracy/committees-and-meetings/other-panels-and-forums/office-relocation-project-executive-group/

where readers are told to consult the project archive:

http://eastdevon.gov.uk/access-to-information/historical-information/relocation-project-documentation-archive/project-document-archive/

Alas, the last document posted there was on 20 February 2013 (in response to the requirement of the Information Tribunal which EDDC lost) and Owl’s attempt to find anything more up-to-date (including current costings and financing arrangements) has so far failed.

Perhaps an EDDC councillor or officer can let Owl know where the latest information is – and who is in charge of the project these days?

Well, officers and councillors must read this blog! I have been pointed to ANOTHER website (thanks):

http://eastdevon.gov.uk/access-to-information/historical-information/relocation-project-documentation-archive/

and here is the latest update:

http://eastdevon.gov.uk/access-to-information/historical-information/relocation-project-documentation-archive/

Archive 8 states on 18 October 2017:

“Progress – going well. Costs remain within budget allowances. Spend to date is £3.745,000 leaving a balance of £6,840,148m.”

and on 15 November 2017:

“Progress – going well. Costs remain within budget allowances. Spend
to date is £1.403m leaving a balance of £6.482m with a contingency of £245,000. Completion date is scheduled for 15 October 2018 with a relocation date of 21 December.”

Click to access joint-project-exec-and-officer-wkg-group-minutes-151117.pdf

Now – Can anyone explain the discrepancy? £3,745,000 spent to date in October 2017 and £1,403,000 to date a month later?

Exmouth: Queen’s Drive “sinkhole”

Picture:  Exmouth Journal

The Bible says:

“Everyone therefore who hears these words of mine, and does them, I will liken him to a wise man, who built his house on a rock. The rain came down, the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat on that house; and it didn’t fall, for it was founded on the rock. Everyone who hears these words of mine, and doesn’t do them will be like a foolish man, who built his house on the sand. The rain came down, the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat on that house; and it fell—and great was its fall.”

— Matthew 7:24–27, World English Bible

Port Royal: Modesty (EDDC) versus ambition (Hugo Swire)

Owl reported last week in Hugo Swire’s grandiose ideas about redevelopment of Sidmouth’s Port Royal, including his suggestion to bring in Prince Charles’s design team:

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2018/02/05/sidmouth-swire-fancies-flats-and-car-parking-at-port-royal-or-getting-prince-charles-in/

Thankfully, the district council has gone for a more “modest” plan. Swire bemoans this and says plans should have been more “ambitious”. Sadly, these days “ambitious” is a word often interchangeable with “greedy” in modern planning terminology!

“District chiefs will not bring in the Prince of Wales’ design team after they opted for a ‘more modest’ direction for Port Royal.

East Devon MP Sir Hugo Swire said the Prince’s Foundation could create a development that has the community’s backing.

But a scoping study for the site revealed a number of ‘unresolved uncertainties’ so East Devon District Council (EDDC) has limited its proposals to marketing the Drill Hall. A spokeswoman said: “Had we felt that it was possible to go forward with a comprehensive redevelopment of the Port Royal site then the involvement of the Prince’s Foundation was certainly worthy of exploration.

“However, as explained, this is a much more modest and specific direction proposed that involves the Drill Hall site only.”

Sir Hugo told the Herald focusing the redevelopment on the Drill Hall would be ‘missed opportunity’ and it required an ambitious approach.”

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/modest-approach-to-port-royal-means-prince-of-wales-design-team-won-t-be-used-1-5395956

240 councils have taken out high-risk “toxic” loans

“A cash-strapped council which has banned all new spending is currently repaying £150m in “toxic” loans.

Northamptonshire County Council has invoked the ban on expenditure as it faces a £21m overspend for 2017-18. It said it would cost more than a quarter of a billion pounds to immediately repay the LOBO – or Lender Option Borrower Option – loans, described by critics as “risky”.

A council spokesman said “interest rate risk is inherent” in all borrowing.
The county council has a total of 19 LOBO loans, which are unregulated and typically spread over 40 to 70 years. They were used to meet expenditure on highways, infrastructure, schools and other such assets.

The authority said said it would cost £256m to repay them straight away.

Critics say the repayments would be better spent on under threat services such as bus subsidies and Trading Standards. Joel Benjamin, from campaign group Debt Resistance UK, called the loans “toxic”. He said the county council has “fallen victim to a lethal cocktail of cuts”, poorly run shared-services and “high interest, risky LOBO borrowing.” Financial expert Abhishek Sachdev said LOBOs “contained huge quantifiable risk at the outset”.

Mr Sachdev, who gave evidence about LOBOs to the Communities & Local Government Select Committee in 2015, added: “There is a reason why none of our large PLC corporate clients would ever enter into such a loan.”
Freedom of Information requests by Debt Resistance UK show around 1,000 LOBO loans have been taken out across 240 local authorities.

The figures show these have a face value of £15bn, while Mr Sachdev estimated it would cost about £26bn to exit them straight away.”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-northamptonshire-42977061

Unitary authorities – the austerity measure that can’t be stopped?

Wonder what that new £10m EDDC HQ will be used for?

“Simon Heffer writes in the Sunday Telegraph to call on the Government to simplify and streamline the UK’s councils, replacing the system of county and district councils with county-level unitary authorities.

The need for “wholesale reform”, he says, has been made urgent by the problem of “social care that will break local government” and former chancellor George Osborne’s “disastrously flawed business rate system, which has had a profound effect on revenue-raising”.

He says that a system of unitary authorities would reduce payroll, offer the chance to sell off assets, and improve the handling of planning decisions, while the Government should remove “huge strategic questions such as social care from council control altogether”.

The Sunday Telegraph, Page: 21

“Councils used as ‘human shields’ for cuts, says John McDonnell”

“John McDonnell has accused the government of using cash-strapped local councils as “human shields” to absorb deep spending cuts by the Treasury.

The shadow chancellor seized on reports that Surrey – where the Runneymede and Weybridge constituency of the chancellor, Philip Hammond, is located – was facing a £100m cash crisis.

Analysis by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism identified Surrey as the council facing the largest gap between expected revenues and expenditures in the coming financial year. The average deficit at the 150 councils the bureau examined was £14.7m.

Meanwhile, a survey of senior council officials by the Local Government Information Unit thinktank found that almost 80% had no confidence in the future sustainability of council finances.

McDonnell said: “If you ever wanted to see the utter failure of this government, look no further than your local council. Many are struggling to maintain many basic services because they are being forced to pass on Tory cuts.

“There needs to be an urgent change of direction in local government funding in this country. We need to see an end to a situation whereby Tory governments are using local councils like human shields as they continue to drive ahead with their failed austerity agenda.”

McDonnell appeared at a conference in Preston alongside the shadow communities secretary, Andrew Gwynne.

Many of the councils under greatest financial pressure are in Tory-held areas, and Conservative MPs have put pressure on the government to relieve the squeeze in particular areas.

Sajid Javid, the communities secretary, announced an extra £150m this week specifically to be spent on social care in areas of greatest need, amid a growing backlash from backbenchers.

But council leaders said it would not be enough to meet rapidly increasing needs.

The LGIU’s survey of councils’ finances suggested that 94% are planning to raise council tax in the coming year to make ends meet, and 65% will be dipping into their financial reserves.

In his speech, McDonnell highlighted alternative approaches to delivering local services.

Labour believes the threat to council services, such as social care and support for children, are the latest stark illustration of the ongoing impact of austerity.

The government has promised to put social care funding on a sustainable footing; but a green paper on the issue is not due to be published until next summer.”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/feb/08/john-mcdonnell-councils-used-human-shields-funding-cuts

“Since Margaret Thatcher came to power, 10% of the area of Britain has left public ownership. No wonder there’s a housing crisis”

“… in all the proliferating discussion about the rights and wrongs of the history of privatisation in Britain – both from those determined to row back against the neoliberal tide and those convinced that renationalisation is the wrong answer – Britain’s biggest privatisation of all never merits a mention. This is partly because so few people are aware that it has even taken place, and partly because it has never been properly studied. What is this mega-privatisation? The privatisation of land.

Some activists have hinted at it. Last October, for instance, the New Economics Foundation (NEF), a progressive thinktank, called in this newspaper for the government to stop selling public land. But the NEF’s is solely a present-day story, picturing land privatisation as a new phenomenon. It gives no sense of the fact that this has been occurring on a massive scale for fully 39 years, since the day that Margaret Thatcher entered Downing Street. During that period, all types of public land have been targeted, held by local and central government alike. And while disposals have generally been heaviest under Tory and Tory-led administrations, they definitely did not abate under New Labour; indeed the NHS estate, in particular, was ravaged during the Blair years.

All told, around 2 million hectares of public land have been privatised during the past four decades. This amounts to an eye-watering 10% of the entire British land mass, and about half of all the land that was owned by public bodies when Thatcher assumed power. How much is the land that has been privatised in Britain worth? It is impossible to say for sure. But my conservative estimate, explained in my forthcoming book on this historic privatisation, called The New Enclosure, is somewhere in the region of £400bn in today’s prices. This dwarfs the value of all of Britain’s other, better known, and often bitterly contested, privatisations. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/feb/08/biggest-privatisation-land-margaret-thatcher-britain-housing-crisis

Oh no! EDDC pledges to become “more commercial” – HELP!

“East Devon District Council say they are taking a ‘more commercial approach to generate income’ as they tackle a predicted budget deficit of £735,000.

A Council Tax increase of £5 a year, giving a Band D council tax of £136.78 a year for 2018/19, is recommended for approval by the council’s cabinet committee when they meet on Wednesday night.

But Cllr Ian Thomas, the council’s portfolio holder for finance, said that as only 25 per cent of income is generated through council tax, they need to find alternative ways of raising money.

Cllr Paul Diviani, Leader of East Devon District Council, said: “The council is developing a more commercial approach to generate income for key council services but as we take our various ideas forward, consultation will be key – for example, consultations about various car parks and public toilets and consultations about other initiatives including how we can make our assets more commercial and income generating.” …

… Future reductions combined with other budgetary pressures mean that the Council’s Medium Term Financial Plan (MTFP) is currently predicting a budget deficit of £0.735m in 2018/19, rising to £3m by 2020/21 and potentially to £5.4m by 2027/28. …”

https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/east-devon-become-more-commercial-1170128

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

That by pass for Axminster wasn’t always flavour of the month!

How times change! Following on from the effusive self-congratulations of EDDC for securing £10 million towards an Axminster by-pass, here is a news item from 2012, published in the now defunct “Sidmouth Independent News” from a time when an Axminster by-pass was thought by EDDC to be a very, very bad idea:

“Trinity House department store in Axminster has had scaffolding ripped off it by a passing lorry. Story here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-devon-20431396

It was sheer luck that no-one was hurt in the accident in this busy main street through the town.

We welcomed people from Axminster to the Stroll to the Knowle on 3 November 2012. When consulted about the Local Plan the majority of those responding preferred to have major development to the east of the town (where there is a potential site) because it could fund a much-wanted and much-needed bypass of the town centre.

EDDC preferred to allow development by EDBF member Axminster Carpets on a site to the north of the town, despite objections to flood risk and traffic management problems. Then Planning supremo Kate Little said that the northern site was preferable as the eastern site was unlikely to result in a bypass, as any road through a new development would not probably be qualified to be called a by-pass.

A judicial review is taking place about this decision – taken whilst the new Local Plan was in its first consultation period and not included in the old Local Plan – early next month. The High Court has taken the rare step of issuing a “protective costs order” in this case where, if local people do lose the case, they will only have to pay a small part of the company’s legal costs.”

https://sidmouthindependentnews.wordpress.com/page/204/?pages-list

Blackhill Quarry: Who’s listening to the Community?

At the time this article was prepared, more than 145 individuals and resident associations had lodged formal objections against Clinton Devon Estate’s (CDE) planning application 17/3022 to create new industrial units on the Blackhill Quarry site. The condition on granting the original quarry licence was that when extraction ceased, the site should be returned to its natural state.

This number of objections is rising hourly, in spite of a determined PR campaign by CDE in the Exmouth Journal and local Parish Magazines to spin a favourable case (It’s only a small bit of land… the site proposed is currently covered in concrete and any restoration to high quality habitat will be problematic…. mitigation proposals that might secure significantly more wildlife benefits for the surrounding heathland are being discussed. Etc.) The consultation period has been extended.

Owl recalls last May CDE launched an on line “tell us what you think” survey with the introduction:

“We look to listen carefully to our staff, customers and those in our community. How we engage with you and what you think about our approach to sustainability is important to us and we want to get it right. Your feedback to this survey will play an important part in helping us develop our future communications.”

The survey asked questions such as:

To what extent do you agree with the following?

1. Clinton Devon Estates puts responsible stewardship and sustainable development at the heart of everything they do?

2. Clinton Devon Estates understands and conserves the wildlife it manages. And

3. How credible do you think “We pledge to do today what is right for tomorrow” is as a statement from Clinton Devon Estates?

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2017/05/30/time-running-out-to-tell-clinton-devon-estates-what-you-think-about-them/

anyone want to rethink their rezponses in light of the above?

Axminster North-South relief road gets £10 million from government plus grant for “Greater Exeter” alternative green spaces

Good news for Axminster? The much-needed relief road that East Devon District Council Tories initially refused to put in the Local Plan (when Bovis was building in the town) is getting a government grant of £10 million. £10 million doesn’t go far on roads these days, so will it be enough? Good news for Crown Estates and Persimmon who are said to own a large parcel of land to the east of Axminster (at least they did in 2015]:

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2016/05/27/axminster-persimmon-and-crown-estates-meet-the-neighbours/

On a more worrying note, “Greater Exeter” (which includes East Devon) also gets £3.7 million for “Greater Exeter Suitable Alternative Natural Green Space” which means allowing developers to build on current green spaces if others can be created elsewhere.

The only problem being, the areas to be concreted over seem to get build on rapidly before the “alternative green spaces” are found or designated!

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/678379/MVF_Successful_Bids.xlsx

Greenfield to concrete

England is losing an area the size of Glasgow every year because of a record number of developments on greenfield land.

Forests, fields and parks are disappearing under concrete at the fastest rate for a quarter of a century, an investigation by The Times has found.

“On average, 170 sq km of greenfield land were built on every year from 2013 to 2016 after the government relaxed planning rules to ease the housing shortage.

The rate of development is more than two-and-a-half times the 25-year average and five times higher than the rate between 2006 and 2011.

If the construction of new homes, shops and infrastructure continues at the present pace, an area the size of Greater London will have been built on by 2028.

Greenfield land — not to be confused with green belt — refers to “previously undeveloped land” that includes farmland, gardens, forests and “grassed areas” in towns and cities.

The Campaign to Protect Rural England said that the government figures were “startling”. Graeme Willis, head of rural campaigns, said: “To use land more sustainably, we must start using it more efficiently. This rate of loss cannot be endured without losing huge swathes of our countryside. It is a non-renewable resource. Once built on, [it] is lost forever.”

The government changed the planning laws in 2012 to increase the rate of building with “a presumption in favour of sustainable development”, which required local authorities to allocate land for development.

“What you saw after 2012 was local authorities getting their houses in order in terms of land supply,” Duncan Hartley, director of planning at Rural Solutions, a property consultancy, said. “They have been allocating sites for development and those sites have had to be substantial to meet housing needs.” The single biggest use for greenfield sites once developed was housing at 17 per cent. The other significant uses were for industrial sites, transport infrastructure, offices and shops.

A spokesman for the Ministry of Housing said: “We will be working to put the environment at the heart of planning, making sure any new development improves the environment locally and nationally, while contributing to the wider commitment to build 300,000 homes a year.”

From 1989 to 2011, most developments were on brownfield sites.

From 2013-16, the pendulum swung the other way, with greenfield sites supplying 54 per cent of the land.”

Source The Times, paywall

“Woodbury business park expansion would be ‘morally and ecologically wrong’ “

The moral of this story? question anything and everything a developer says or promises.

“Environmental campaigners have said it would be ‘morally and ecologically wrong’ to allow proposed expansion business units at Blackhill Quarry in Woodbury.

The scheme, for the proposed expansion of Blackhill Engineering, is seeking approval of access for construction of up to 3251 sqm (35,000 sq ft) of general industrial floor space with access, parking and associated infrastructure.

The proposed development is located within the area that is currently being turned into a nature reserve, which was previously used as the processing area for extracted minerals and latterly for the processing of material transported to the site from other quarries.

The processing plant in “Area 12” is being removed as planned and the area was to be restored to heathland.

But Tony Bennett, from Wild Woodbury, has said that the plans would seek to reverse this restoration plan and the “U-turn” would be a huge blow to the environment as it sits within one of the most highly protected and scientifically important areas of countryside in Europe.

Mr Bennett added: “The heathland restoration plan represented a prime opportunity to turn a significant area of industrial wasteland into a nature reserve that will benefit everyone. The U-turn would make a mockery of the Conservative government’s new environmental initiative entitled “A green future – Our 25 year plan to Improve the Environment”.

“Lowland heaths are wild open areas similar to Moorland, and Woodbury Common is one of the few areas of it that are left in the UK. With regards to flora & fauna the Pebblebed heaths are home to many important species including rare butterflies such as the pearl-bordered fritillary and silver-studded blue, 24 types of dragonfly and damselfly, and innumerable rare plants. Notable birds include the hobby, the nocturnal nightjar, hen harrier and the elusive Dartford warbler. Deer, foxes, rabbits & hares, several species of rare bats, and many other mammals also make it their home.

“The application shows a total disregard for public opinion. The applicant states that it was not considered necessary to carry out a “formal community consultation exercise” as the site is “remote from any settlement”. By allowing this area to be used for industrial purposes the public are being deprived of access to an area that should be heathland.

“There will be a massive increase in number of cars using an already over stretched local road network. More huge heavy transporters and low-loaders will be bringing materials to and from the industrial site causing congestion and damage to roads that are too narrow and unsuitable for this type of vehicle. “Indeed complaints from residents of the nearby towns and parish councils about traffic problems, and the unsuitability of the location was one of the main reasons that the processing plant in area 12 was closed down.

“This extremely sensitive area should be restored – not degraded by further industry. It would be morally and ecologically wrong to allow development in this area.”

Woodbury parish council have also voted to object to the application.

The application says: “Quarrying operations within the site have diminished and the existing sifting and grading plant structures which remain on site today are largely redundant. It is proposed that they are removed, allowing new development to take place and to facilitate the expansion of the existing Blackhill Engineering business, as there is a clearly identified need to expand the existing premises on the adjoining land.

“The proposal is to construct three separate buildings units that would be clustered around an open service yard and the existing site entrance would be used to provide access to the scheme.

“Blackhill Engineering’s operations have grown substantially in recent years and their existing facilities are now at capacity. As a result, the existing facilities are unable to facilitate further growth of the business, and if they are to remain in their current premises, they now need to expand their operations onto the application site.

“The proposed development would be within the area that the existing quarry equipment is currently located, which would in turn be removed.”

East Devon District Council planners will determine the fate of the planning application.”

http://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/woodbury-business-park-expansion-would-1115778

What if businesses and tourism turn right at the Severn bridge when tolls are removed this year?

“The government announced last July that tolls would end on the Severn bridges by end 2018.

What happens to our Local Enterprise Partnership and Greater Exeter Growth Plans if everyone turns right at Bristol?

As a current Guardian article says:

… “The abolition of the tolls on the Severn bridges will create a “once in a lifetime” chance to build an economic region to rival the northern powerhouse and challenge the south-east of England, politicians, business leaders and academics have said.

Making the crossings between the west of England and south Wales free could lead to a “western powerhouse” stretching from Bath and Bristol to Swansea, boosting prosperity and jobs, advocates believe.

A summit at the Celtic Manor resort, on the Welsh side of the border, yesterday discussed how regions on either side of the bridges could benefit from government plans to abolish the tolls by the end of the year……..”

The concept of a “Severnside” region has been around for decades. Welsh devolution is seen as one reason why the concept lost traction but Brexit has led to a reassessment.

Dylan Jones-Evans, the assistant pro-vice chancellor at the University of South Wales, said abolishing the tolls was a once in a lifetime opportunity. “Many businesses on both sides of the bridges felt [the tolls] formed a major psychological and financial barrier. Wales was seen as being separate from the rest of the UK economy.”

But he warned: “The current transport provision for road and rail between south Wales and the south west of England is not fit for purpose. … “

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/jan/22/calls-to-abolish-tolls-on-severn-bridges-to-build-western-powerhouse

“Key figures in Devon and Somerset devolution deal meet to thrash out a way forward”

Owl says: Translation of headline – “A few rich businesspeople with vested interests and a few power hungry but rather uninformed councillors with their eye on the future panic because they risk having their fingers extracted from lucrative pies and will make unsustainable promises if that’s what it takes to keep them in”.

And as for that “productivity strategy”:
https://eastdevonwatch.org/2017/12/04/dcc-corporate-infrastructure-and-regulatory-services-scrutiny-committee-savages-hotsw-growth-strategy/

“Moves to shift more power and cash to the Westcountry took an important step forward this week when key players met civil servants to thrash out the way forward. The Westcountry has been pushing to join former Chancellor George Osborne’s “devolution revolution”, which would take powers away from London and put it into the hands of local people.

The first meeting in Whitehall last week included discussions on transport infrastructure, broadband access, home building and support for business growth.

The bid for devolution is led by the Heart of the South West local enterprise partnership, which includes leaders from business and councils across Somerset and Devon, including Plymouth, Torbay and Exeter.

A delegation has now met representatives from the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy to discuss devolution proposals.

The group claims that additional decision making and budget powers could have huge benefits for the Westcountry, including higher productivity, better paid jobs, improved transport links and more affordable homes.

Devon and Somerset are lagging behind the rest of the country. By November 2016, 11 regions had already reached devolution agreements.

Heart of the South West submitted its first proposal in February 2016, but has yet to reach a concrete deal.

An earlier stumbling block, the election of a regional mayor, has already been removed by the Government.

The issue had threatened to split the partnership.

But now civil servants have agreed to hold regular meetings on the issue, according to the region’s leaders involved in the bid.

Plymouth Council leader Ian Bowyer said: “Creating a strong economy, which means jobs, stability and strong prospects for our young people as well as families is vital for the future of Plymouth and the region as a whole. We are already working together across so many areas to deliver growth.

“This was a really positive meeting and sets the scene for closer working that will benefit all our residents.”

A total of 23 partnership organisations from across the region, which also includes clinical commissioning groups and national parks, are involved in the plans.

A joint committee for the Heart of the South West economic region is now being set up to move the discussions forward.

Cllr David Fothergill, chair of the Heart of the South West shadow joint committee, said of last week’s meeting: “We explained our vision for the area and how to help it become more prosperous.

“We discussed skills, transport infrastructure, broadband access, ways to provide more homes where they are needed and support for businesses to grow, innovate and export more. We also talked about the specific challenges faced by rural communities.”

The group said its first meeting will be in March, where it will agree a productivity strategy.”

http://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/key-figures-devon-somerset-devolution-1106519

Well, that’s it: PegasusLife wins Knowle appeal

“An application to create a 113-home retirement community at East Devon District Council’s current HQ has been allowed on appeal by the Planning Inspector.

PegasusLife lodged an appeal following the scheme’s refusal in December 2016.

A public inquiry was held over five days in November 2017.

The new development will be classed C2, which means Sidmouth will miss out on thousands of pounds’ worth of contributions towards affordable housing.

Read reactions in Friday’s Sidmouth Herald.”

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/developer-wins-appeal-for-113-home-retirement-community-at-knowle-1-5365209

“Secretary of State forecasts increase in number of unitary authorities”

Might Devon unitisation take place soon AFTER EDDC moves to its new luxury HQ?

“The Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government says he expects the number of unitary authorities in England to be higher in five years’ time.

Sajid Javid’s comments came in response to a question from former Cabinet colleague Patrick McLoughlin, who noted that both Scotland and Wales “are totally served by unitary local authorities”.

Sajid Javid 146x219The Secretary of State responded: “I can tell him that 60% of English people are served by unitary authorities, and I expect the number to be higher in five years’ time, given the views of many local people about unitary authorities and our commitment to consider unitarisation whenever requested.”

In November 2017 Javid said he was ‘minded to’ back the Future Dorset plans, which involve the replacement of the nine local authorities in the council with two unitaries.

Under this model, one ‘urban’ unitary would be created through the merger of Bournemouth, Poole and Christchurch. The other ‘rural’ unitary would be established from East Dorset, North Dorset, Purbeck, West Dorset and Weymouth & Portland. The county council would cease to exist.

However, councillors at Christchurch agreed this month to write to the Secretary of State to set out their vision of an alternative to the proposed shake-up. The council also approved an initial budget of £15,000 to take legal advice “and if necessary initiate legal proceedings to protect the interests of Christchurch Borough Council and its residents”.

Though not involving the establishment of unitary authorities, the Secretary of State said in December that he was ‘minded to’ back the merger of Taunton Deane Borough Council and West Somerset District Council, and the merger of Forest Heath District Council and St Edmundsbury Borough Council into single district councils.”

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php

Cost of fly-tipping in East Devon

“Figures attained through a Freedom of Information request show that East Devon District Council (EDDC) has been forced to fork out an estimated £41,552 clearing up dumped waste across its patch.

In Sidmouth, 110 reported cases of fly-tipping were dealt with by council workers between 2015 and 2017. Last year, 44 reports of fly-tipping in Sidmouth were made to the council – compared to 21 in 2016. In 2015, 45 incidents were reported – the highest total in the last three years.

The figures place Sidmouth fourth in the overall standings of towns hit hardest by fly-tippers.

Exmouth took the lion’s share between 2015 and 2017 – with 223 reported cases. It has cost an estimated £12,488 of taxpayer cash so EDDC can deal with the incidents.

Honiton was the second highest, with 134 cases reported – costing an estimated £7,504 to clean up.

Axminster had 113 incidents reported, with the council spending an estimated £6,328 there to deal with the waste.

The figures reveal that, on average, fly-tippers are costing taxpayers around £13,500 per year.

In Ottery St Mary, there were 83 reported cases of fly-tipping between 2015 and 2017. EDDC spent an estimated £4,648 clearing up the waste.

A council spokeswoman said the costs provided to the Herald were based on estimated figures used on Waste Data Flow – the national system that councils use to record fly-tip data.

She added: “In reality this figure is lower than the actual cost to EDDC as it is designed more for urban councils than rural ones.

“It is not possible to get an accurate cost to EDDC due to the huge diversity in size and type of fly-tip, so the costs stated are estimates only.”

Sidmouth Town Council chairman Ian McKenzie-Edwards said: “I personally am not aware of a serious fly-tipping problem within the Sid Valley.

“I can accept that it occurs in the more remote reaches of East Devon. Are we not blessed with a state-of-the-art recycling centre? This should provide no excuse whatsoever for fly-tipping!”