Stripped back local government and its consequences

“This week, the Grenfell Recovery Taskforce issued its first report into the response of the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea after nine weeks of research. The findings are damning, as anyone following the story would expect, and focus on particular cultural failings in the council that worsened the response.

The report speaks of “a leadership vacuum”, with a “distant council” and a lack of emotional intelligence in dealing with survivors and the community. It says empathy and emotional intelligence need to be put at the heart of its recovery plans. “We have seen many good intentions, which have gone unrecognised by residents,” says the report.

“Often what has been lacking is the appropriate ‘style’ of delivery, where an approach that had empathy at its core would have had greater positive impact. Systems, policies and practice need to be designed with people’s current needs at the heart as opposed to what is good or convenient administrative practice.”

This comment speaks to one of the main failings of the council: to understand what the community needed, not just in terms of temporary accommodation, rehousing and the release of funds, but with regards to people centred response services. Many complained that the council seemed robotic in its responses, focusing on defending its approach rather than accepting and understanding that people viewed its actions as inadequate and working out precisely why.

It was a council that had become insular, disconnected and in particular distant from communities similar to those on the Lancaster West estate. Despite the tragedy being unprecedented, the council appears to have become fixated on behaving as though the recovery could be dealt with within traditional local government frameworks, notes the report, which says the council needs to be bolder.

The taskforce urges the government to encourage a “highly innovative” response responding to residents’ needs, rather than being “bound by tried and tested bureaucratic response systems that are not appropriate in these circumstances”. …

Kensington and Chelsea is an extreme example of the stripped-back local government we now see across Britain. This is due not just to austerity hollowing out council accounts and making it impossible to deliver services, but also to a philosophical shift in the way councils operate. Too many have shifted from providing hands-on, local services with a high level of resident involvement, to an aloof, threadbare service that consists of both councillors and staff who eschew frontline work and meetings for a rigid managerialism and dismissal of residents as obstacles and annoyances.

Local politics is far closer to everyday lives than national politics; by its very nature, empathy and emotional intelligence are absolutely imperative to a functioning council. It’s tragic that the Grenfell tower fire and external criticisms were necessary for the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea to understand that.”

https://www.theguardian.com/housing-network/2017/nov/10/grenfell-council-lack-empathy-local-government-austerity-britain

Claire Wright: “Director of Ladram Bay Holiday Park attempts intimidation at public meeting”

Carter family (Ladram Bay, Greendale Business Park and other businesses) prefer absent Hugo Swire MP to present DCC councillor Claire Wright. Surprise, surprise!

“A director of Ladram Bay Holiday Park ordered me to be silent and leave a public meeting last night, which was called to discuss traffic concerns associated with his business.

The meeting, which was held in the restaurant of Ladram Bay, was arranged at the behest of myself and Otterton Parish Council, following widespread concern over the level of traffic and size of vehicles travelling to and from the caravan park.

It was attended by around 70 Otterton residents, who were largely exasperated and angry about the problems caused by the continually expanding caravan park.

At the end of the meeting I outlined three key concerns that I had heard in the meeting, in order to seek assurances from the management team. They were on:

• frequent use of retrospective planning applications
• continual expansion (a huge increase in the number of lodges and caravans)
• level of traffic and size of vehicles travelling to and from the park and funding potential mitigating road improvements

But before I could get more than a sentence out, Robin Carter approached me and asked me to stop talking. He added that I wasn’t welcome and that I should leave.

His co-director, Zoe House, added that the members of the public were there at their invitation (I had just mentioned my letter that was delivered to every house in the village).

The room sort of erupted at this point and there were shouts of:

“Let her speak!” “She’s our representative!” “Leave her alone!”

Robin Carter, whose family also own the controversial Greendale Business Park at Woodbury Salterton, told residents that I wasn’t their representative. Hugo Swire was. He added that I was not going to “canvass for votes” on their property.

I replied that I was Otterton’s Devon County Councillor and was entitled to speak at a public meeting.

I said I would like to finish my points. But after almost every sentence, Mr Carter interjected with similar remarks – and to more shouting from outraged residents.

One of my points was that if highways officers identified any road improvements whether Ladram Bay might consider contributing funding. Seeing as Robin Carter was standing right in front of me, I directed this question at him.

He then moved so close it felt as though he was actually squaring up to me. Someone called out: “That’s intimidation!” I asked him to move back, which he did but only slightly. He glared angrily and carried on addressing me in a low menacing voice.

Mr Carter said that if I had these points to make I should raise them in a private meeting, not in public and that I should hurry up and finish what I was saying.

I replied that I had already attended a private meeting with his co-director, Zoe House and the parish council in August. That many of these points were already made and surely now was the time, with residents present, to provide these assurances.

Cue further glaring and, no answers.

Many residents came up to me afterwards to thank me for standing up for them, and to Mr Carter.
***************************
The meeting started with a PR video set to music, which struck me as entirely the wrong note. It was the sort of video that would have been more appropriate for investors. Then the Ladram representatives read out a list of accolades awarded to the company.

Management team Steven Harper-Smith and Will Tottle who ran the presentation and fielded questions seemed out of their depth at times and as a new member of staff, Mr Harper-Smith was unaware of the continual retrospective planning applications.

People complained they couldn’t hear. It wasn’t helped by the loud thumping music coming from downstairs, which I asked to be turned down. It wasn’t.

Some of the management team’s points, such as the new £10 fee (increased from £5) for parking on site, which they claimed reduced congestion in the village and was “not a money making scheme” was met with understandable derision. How can this improve traffic and parking in the village?!

They said that their letters to visitors included a line about driving carefully through the village. That this was “a journey” and the start of a positive relationship with the parish council.

A traffic survey carried out in August by a group associated with the parish council found that around 35 per cent of traffic travelling through Otterton is generated by Ladram Bay. Another survey is imminent.

The incredible claim by the management team that traffic hadn’t increased much over the years and that all roads were busier, was met with loud and understandable frustration. The park has expanded massively over the years, with hundreds of pitches – and the traffic has increased with it!

I should add here that on my visits to Otterton I have observed a genuine and real problem with the level of traffic on the road and the absolutely enormous caravans and lodges that make their way through the village and residents tell me, knock walls down, erode banks and damage trees and hedges.

There was acknowledgement of this damage and a promise to repair it. How further damage is prevented is another issue, when the road is simply too narrow for the size of the loads.

Someone asked for a commitment for a maximum number of lodges so the village could have peace of mind on further development. This was supported by clapping.

The management team did not commit to this.

Someone else suggested that the lodges should be brought in by barge instead.

One resident said the number of cars increasing in the village was not related to Ladram Bay. It was due to people having more cars. It was clear that this view was not shared by the vast majority of residents.

Someone else described the traffic situation as “horrendous.”

Then the thorny subject of planning was raised. Ladram Bay is in an Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty and in a coastal preservation zone. The landscape is highly protected under a number of strong policies. Yet planning consent keeps being given for expansion. And many of these planning applications are submitted after the building has taken place.

One resident spoke on this in a very informed way about this. He asked why the dog walking area was now a car park and said there was no point in objecting to the planning application as the trees had already been removed. The team were vague on this but the new general manager did say that in future what they did would comply with planning consent.

Parish council chairman, John Fudge told the meeting that the parish council had objected to the application but it was approved by East Devon District Council’s planning committee.

This started a bit of a debate in the room and how people are not notified about planning applications. And why there is one rule for them and another for Ladram Bay.

An attendee asked the Ladram Bay owners to liaise with the village and said that the park should “have the decency to talk to the village” over planning applications and it was no surprise that there was “distrust and a complete lack of confidence” in the business by residents.

A resident of Ladram Road said she had been hit twice by vehicles and there needed to be speed deterrents. The management team agreed.

A resident of Fore Street said that she takes her life in her hands every time she leaves her house and that traffic is travelling too fast.

Someone replied that community speedwatch found few cars travelling over 30mph but that was too fast anyway. That the village needed a 20mph zone.

(This is something I have been investigating and will continue to do so).

John Fudge, parish council chairman spoke at the end of the meeting to thank people for coming. He said the parish council would work with Ladram Bay to improve the situation. He said he believed there was a genuine desire on the part of the caravan park to improve things.

Directors, Robin Carter and Zoe House remained silent throughout the meeting. Until I spoke at the end.

What do I think of Robin Carter’s behaviour? I think it was aggressive and an (unsuccessful) attempt at intimidation. It was totally inappropriate and completely unnecessary. I am a key representative of Otterton people and I am entitled to attend and speak at a public meeting.

A thriving business on the edge of Otterton is a positive thing. Otterton Mill is also a successful local business. Yet I haven’t heard a single complaint about Otterton Mill. All the complaints I have heard have been about the attitude of the senior management team at Ladram Bay, their lack of consideration and the effect that their continual expansion plans have on the village.

I am hoping that this will be the start of a more positive and considerate relationship between residents and Ladram Bay. Local people deserve better.”

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

So, guess who EDDC’s new external auditors will be

Yep, former auditors Grant Thornton – the ones who found no problems following the expulsion from the local Tory party and subsequent resignation of disgraced ex-councillor Graham Brown after the front page sting in the Daily Telegraph.

And too late to send any representations about it.

“Having carried out their procurement exercise and decided on the scale of work to be allocated to each of the winning bidders, PSAA notified the Chief Finance Officer and Chief Executive that it was consulting on the appointment of Grant Thornton LLP as being successful in winning a contract and their appointed to EDDC for the 5 years from 2018/19, the appointment starting on 1 April 2018. Any representations to the proposal would need to be received by 22nd September 2017, as there was no reason to object to this appointment no representation was made.”

Click to access 161117agcombinedagenda.pdf

Developer offers small bribe to avoid building affordable homes which would increase profits by millions

The development: 300 homes in beautiful Gittisham, home of the latest very posh and very popular “Pig at ..” hotel chain.

The bribe: £400,000

The catch: Allow Baker Homes to cut their “affordable” properties from 120 to 90.

So, for the likely cost of ONE of their new homes, let them build 29 more of them and see 30 families lose out on cheaper (but not cheap) homes.

Let’s say each new home cosy a very conservative £300,000 x in fact the average cost is likely to be MUCH more than that. Affordable homes would have cost £240,000 (a 20% discount).

120 homes sold at £240,000 = £28,800,000
180 homes sold at £300,000 = £54,000,000
Total income from sales: £88,800,000

or

90 homes sold at £240,000 = £21,600,000
210 homes sold at £300,000 = £63,000,000
Total sales = £74,600,000
Less £400,000 paid to council
Total income from sales = £74,200,000

Total increase in sales = £14,400,000

and all for an outlay of £400,000

If the houses DO cost even more the profit will be even higher.

So, what’s it to be Honiton? A bit of cash or 30 families done out of homes they MIGHT be able to afford – at a pinch?

And now for good news: £2 parking all day in EDDC car parks for winter

East Devon District Council has launched its five-month winter parking special offer.

From now until March 31 people can park all day for £2, regardless of what time they arrive.

It is a departure from the council’s usual policy of not starting the parking offer until 10am to avoid prime parks being blocked by commuters.

But this year officials wanted to be as generous as possible and say they are confident that the simple offer will work well.

The special offer tickets will be valid until midnight in all 41 EDDC pay and display car parks in Exmouth, Seaton, Sidmouth, Budleigh Salterton, Beer, Axminster, Honiton, Ottery St Mary, Lympstone and Colyton. But it does exclude Parkmobile payments and Permit Holders.

Customers should not be concerned if they notice that their ticket may not have an expiry time of midnight printed on it. Parking officers will be checking that the £2 has been paid, which will make the ticket valid for the rest of that day. …”

http://www.midweekherald.co.uk/news/east-devon-district-council-s-2-all-day-parking-offer-1-5269412

“Councils embracing commercialisation, says survey”

Do you agree that your council tax should fund EDDC as a “commercial enterprise”?

Bear in mind as you think about this and read below, its HQ move has gone up from “cost neutral” to the most recent estimate of around £10 million.

And ask yourself: how many of our councillors (town, district and county) would you trust to run your local sweet shop? And is this all academic anyway when increasingly the purse strings are being controlled by our Local Enterprise Partnership?

“Commercialisation has become the most talked about topic in councils this year, with some seeing turnover equivalent to a FTSE 250 company, according to research gathered by Zurich Municipal.

The insurer conducted in-depth interviews with 22 council chiefs across England and Scotland gathering findings into the Why are we here? The 2017 Senior Managers’ Risk Report (link below).

This revealed that many councils are embracing the opportunity to become commercial entities with one council chief interviewed by Zurich admitted to turnover of £1.5bn.

“Commercial income generating projects are the new norm for local government, with some competing against one another to buy and build hotels, harbours, piers, cinemas, university campuses, and science and research parks,” the report – released at the Solace Summit in Manchester yesterday – stated.

Many see the potential for commercially generated revenue to be re-invested in local communities, however, some spoke of the need not to stray to much into private sector disciplines, while others said it should not be pursued at any cost.

However, austerity is still seen as an ongoing challenge, with some councils saying that services cannot be cut any further.

Funding issues are also harming relations with central government, the research revealed.

One council chief executive said: “We need a frank discussion with government. We can’t carry on doing everything we do.”

Rod Penman, head of public services at Zurich Municipal said: “Councils are facing challenges from all sides, and many are employing commercial ventures to mitigate some of the lasting effects of austerity.

“This approach is not without its challenges, however. There is the growing potential for moral and commercial dilemmas at almost every turn, and it is clear that council chiefs are concerned about the long-term relationship between national and local government.”

Another theme to emerge from the study is the perception of councils following the Grenfell fire.

Council chiefs said they felt the tragedy marked a watershed in how local government’s purpose and remit is viewed.

One commented: “The Grenfell Tower disaster means we will take more consideration of community discussions.”

Penman added that councils needed to “improve the narrative” about the choices they take, especially in a more commercial environment.

“Framing decisions in a purely commercial light simply isn’t an option when the social value of public bodies and services has to be factored in,” he said.”

The full report is here:
http://newsandviews.zurich.co.uk/expert-lab/balancing-priorities-are-councils-facing-an-identity-crisis/

Knowle Pegasus inquiry details

The Inquiry will commence at

10.00am on
Tuesday 28 November 2017
in the Council Chamber, Council Offices,
Knowle, Sidmouth EX10 8HL

The Inquiry is expected to be heard for the duration of five days.

Air pollution statistics in East Devon

Particulates: 6.8 per cubic metre (should be lower than 2.5 but not amongst the worst offenders

Deaths: 3.9% of deaths attributed to air pollution.

Interestingly, Exeter is only slightly worse than East Devon:

Particulates: 7.4 per cubic metre and 4.2% of deaths.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/2017/10/30/eastbourne-bracing-air-among-polluted-britain/

Is a new, powerful supra-regional authority being created without public consultation?

Owl says: yes!

On 1 January 2018, a new “Joint Committee” will come into being.

It is charged with delivery of a “productivity strategy” for the whole Devon and Somerset area.

For its (sinister?) aims and objectives, see section 1.3 here:

Click to access 011117bpcabinethotsw%20jcarrangementsappendixc.pdf

Truly, we live in disturbing times as NONE of this has had ANY public consultation, yet, at EDDC, it will be decided on the nod at its Cabinet meeting on 1 November 2017:

Click to access 011117combinedcabinetagenda.pdf

Some really worrying points:

In Section 2.2 it says that the joint committee can at any time extend its powers as it sees fit.

Section 9.2 says a simple majority of votes will decide actions [the membership will be overwhelmingly Tory]

Section 12.0 Chief Executives and Monitoring Officers will be able to add items to the agenda.

NO DOCUMENT PUT FORWARD HAS ANY MENTION OF SCRUTINY OR TRANSPARENCY

The new “joint authority” authority consists of:

[MEMBERS]

Dartmoor National Park Authority
Devon County Council
East Devon District Council
Exeter City Council
Exmoor National Park Authority
Mendip District Council
Mid Devon District Council
North Devon Council
Plymouth City Council
Sedgemoor District Council
Somerset County Council
South Hams District Council
South Somerset Council
Torbay Council
Taunton Deane Borough Council
Teignbridge District Council
Torridge District Council
West Devon Borough Council
West Somerset Council

PLUS CO-OPTED NON-VOTING MEMBERS:

Heart of the South West Local Enterprise Partnership
NHS Northern, Eastern and Western Devon Clinical Commissioning Group
NHS South Devon and Torbay Clinical Commissioning Group
NHS Somerset Clinical Commissioning Group

AND ANY OTHER CO-OPTED MEMBERS THAT THE JOINT COMMISSIONING GROUP DECIDES TO INVITE

Wildlife refuges on River Exe agreed – will it affect water sports?

Will this affect the watersports centre and, if so, will EDDC effect a covenant on its land to allow for it?

“… The Exmouth site covers an area on the east side of the River Exe, running from a point west of Exmouth Leisure Centre up to a point west of Lympstone Manor. …

“We are now calling on the wide range of Estuary users for their co-operation and support as we ask them to avoid a very small part of the Exe Estuary – all year round at Dawlish Warren’s refuge and from mid-September to end of December at Exmouth’s refuge.”

The refuges are part of the Exe Estuary Special Protection Area, which regularly provides space for 20,000 birds to rest and feed.

East Devon District Council, Teignbridge District Council and Exeter City Council must legally prevent disturbance to birds and deterioration of their habitats [though this may or may not continue after Brexit when the UK is freed from EU regulations].”

http://www.exmouthjournal.co.uk/news/wildlife-refuges-given-green-light-in-exmouth-and-dawlish-warren-1-5249723

Grenadier in Exmouth again today – some questions to ponder

Grenadier are at Ocean again today. 9 to 5.

Here are a few possible questions to ask Grenadier or EDDC:

How much is Grenadier paying EDDC for the 125 year lease for the whole of the Phase 2 site? (Presumably this is no longer commercially sensitive information) and what are arrangements for profit-sharing (if any).

Does the designation of Phase 3 now as “mixed use” means business, commercial or residential or a combination of these uses?

Whose idea/decision was it to reroute the road? There is confusion as to whether it was EDDC or Grenadier.

Is there a longer-term plan for the area that has not yet been disclosed?

Chance of straight answers to simple questions?

EAST DEVON DISTRICT COUNCIL PLANNERS RECOMMEND DEVELOPMENT ON HIGH RISK FLOOD ZONES AT WINSLADE PARK

PRESS RELEASE

[Here’s a summary of recent developments regarding local planning applications which are likely to affect village residents. As you will see, things are once again starting to ‘move’ and we will endeavour toi keep you updated on decisions and outcomes if and when they occur. We are aware that since the Save Clyst St Mary campaign was first launched, nearly four years ago, a number of new residents have moved to the village who may wish to join the group. Should you know of anyone who has moved here since early 2014, we would be grateful if you could forward this document and encourage new residents to sign up to subsequent updates (via our email address or a note through the door of 11, Clyst Valley Road).]

“The latest hybrid planning application (16/2460/MOUT) from Friends Life Limited/Aviva for 150 dwellings, plus employment and new workplace units at Winslade Park is due to be considered by East Devon District Council’s Development Management Committee on 31st October 2017, with the Planning Officers’ Recommendation to the Committee of Approval with Conditions within a 58-page document containing 20 Conditions plus a proposed Viability Legal Agreement.

The outline new build part of the application incorporates very limited information, which the majority of Consultees have found insufficient for making informed decisions and have either recommended refusal (Devon County Highways), have major concerns, find the proposals unacceptable or object (including Historic England, Sport England, the Parish Council, Ward Councillor and East Devon’s Historic Conservation, Landscape, Tree and Environmental Health Departments), plus 225 total objections generated by local residents.

For the existing local community of Clyst St Mary the flood risk is a major concern because historically the Grindle Brook and River Clyst have frequently caused severe damage.

[Pictures of historical flooding]

The link below identifies the current flood risk and shows the vulnerability of the Winslade Park site, proving that substantial future flood defences are essential.

https://flood-warning-information.service.gov.uk/long-term-flood-risk/map?easting=297816&northing=90559&address=100040161688

East Devon’s planning recommendation states “The access road leading into the site, the area where the offices are proposed and areas of land around the Grindle Brook running through the site fall within flood zones 2 and 3 on the Environment Agency’s mapping system.

The new-build employment units are identified to be located adjacent to the entrance drive, part of this site is within flood zone 2 and a smaller part is in flood zone 3. Whilst it is not best practice to site new buildings in the flood zone, the allocation of the site is constrained by the flood zone(s) and if all buildings were sited outside the flood zone(s) then it is considered that the quantum of development in the allocation could not reasonably be delivered and therefore could affect the viability of the scheme. The employment use would be a less vulnerable use than the residential use and therefore it is less likely to be used/occupied in the event of a flood. Accordingly, it is considered that the proposed location of the employment units (based on the illustrative layout) would be acceptable and is the most appropriate location.”

Although the Environment Agency has been provided with a Flood Risk Assessment, their own website states that “flood defences do not completely remove the chance of flooding and can fail in extreme weather conditions,” leaving future residential and employment users of this site at risk.

Aviva is one of the linked companies associated with this proposed development at Winslade Park. Their Chief Executive, Mark Wilson, was noted for finalising the £5.6 billion acquisition of Friends Life with the resulting merger turning Aviva into one of the UK’s largest investors managing £300 billion plus assets.

Writing in the Telegraph in 2014, he emphasised that there should be a halt on building on “defenceless” flood plains. He stated that “As a nation we need to build more homes, but the cost of development must include the cost of defences. We can’t stop the weather, but we can act in unison to minimise the impact of extreme events and we know that the threat is only going to increase, with scientists predicting greater flood frequency and extreme weather as a result of climate change. Although the current focus for us all is coastal and river flooding, surface water flooding is a major concern. More homes, driveways and car parks all contribute to more water flowing into the system, and flowing quickly.”

He acknowledged that flooding is one of the most traumatic events that any householder or business can face, with families forced out of their homes, valuable and much-loved possessions being ruined and businesses struggling to trade. It can be many months before the drying-out process is completed and subsequent repairs can commence and he understood the emotional cost, trauma and feeling of vulnerability that comes with flooding. His mantra continued “Let’s be crystal clear: no defences, no development.”

Such strong opinions on flooding are applauded and ideally could benefit the development proposals by the Insurance Group for the residential, workplace and community areas at Winslade Park, Clyst St Mary that lie within flood zones!

The accessibility of guarantees for affordable insurance on households and businesses in flood-prone areas is comforting for existing homes and businesses but is East Devon District Council so restricted in the availability of quality development sites throughout their sizeable District that they are left reliant on recommending development on high risk flood zones?”

Another reason to have a breakaway eastern East Devon?

Very, very few people in the eastern part of East Devon will benefit from this, yet it is in the EDDC area.

“The Department for Transport (DfT) has confirmed funding for two major projects in Devon …

[One is £9 m at Sherford new town near Plymouth]

… east of Exeter, the continuing growth and development will receive a £4 million boost, which with £3 million developer contributions will deliver improvements to Moor Lane junction to provide more capacity for traffic using the A30 and from Sowton Industrial estate; extension of the higher quality cycle routes into the city; an additional multi-use car park at the Science Park; plus extension of the electric bike scheme.

The news has been welcomed by Devon County Council, which put in the bids for the DfT funding.

Councillor Andrea Davis, Devon County Council Cabinet Member for Infrastructure, Development and Waste, said:

“This is great news for Devon. Great for Devon residents, and great for Devon businesses. The £9 million will bring with it improvements in Exeter, and much needed access, and High Street, to the new town of Sherford. Both schemes will be a boost for new housing, jobs and connectivity in Devon.”

https://www.devonnewscentre.info/new-schemes-will-be-a-boost-for-housing-and-jobs-in-devon/

Should the East Devon district be split? The People’s Republic of Eastern East Devon?

A recent commentator on this blog wants to see Sidmouth leave EDDC.

This raises an interesting possibility.

There is a case for EDDC being broken up as it is already the largest District Council in Devon, and the fastest growing. Increasingly, our district council concentrates on its western side – the Science Park, Cranbrook – the LEP Growth Area – and aligns itself more and more with “Greater Exeter” with other communities feeling increasingly out on an ignored limb.

It would seem from anecdotal evidence that he vast majority of Sidmouth residents would vote to leave EDDC, especially when EDDC is cutting all its ties with the town and moving physically and increasingly representationally to Honiton/Exeter.

The interesting bit is whether other communities would wish to join with Sidmouth in a ‘breakaway’. Would Newton Poppleford, Otterton, Branscombe and Beer, Ottery, Budleigh, Colyton and Seaton be up for creating a new largely rural and coastal authority? And what to call it? Eastern East Devon? Jurassic Devon?

There would be no problem over viability. Some functions might still be shared. Others, such as street cleaning, could be devolved to town council level where it belongs.

There would be an obvious improvement in democratisation, and representation, and, crucially, a big improvement in the quality of councillors. There is also an interesting opportunity to create from the outset a non-party-political district responsible for its own planning. Far more people would stand for an authority when they had a much greater say in decisions affecting their own community; when they and they alone decided on such things as health care, education and environment without having to kowtow to “Greater Exeter”.

Jurassic Devon would have a population of about 50,000, which many would say would be close to the ideal.

Time to consider the break away?

Public land sell off with no affordable homes built – map

Knowle site identified [correction – identified as Stowford Lodge site]

http://neweconomics.org/save-public-land/

Want to comment on LEP’s business plan for us? Go to Torbay council website says Sidmouth Herald!

Sidmouth Herald (as part of Archant a BIG supporter of our LEP) prints a press release on the Sidmouth Herald website on “consultation” on the LEP’s new, improved, answer to all our prayers business plan, citing the enthusiastic words of Paul Diviani, the Deputy Chair of an un-named committee.

Unfortunately, according to the press release, the consultation document appears to be only on Torbay’s website! No link to an EDDC website or the LEP’s own website!

Sloppy.

Perhaps the first consultation comment might be: put your own house in order before you attempt to put a nuclear cell in those of other people!

Here is the press release, in full, in all its glory, where 20 or so business and council members, many with nuclear interests or nuclear-industry-supporting industries attempt to persuade the rest of us that most of their (ie our) money going to Hinkley C is a good thing:

County and district councils in the two counties, along with the Heart of the South West Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP), Dartmoor and Exmoor national park authorities, and NHS commissioning groups from Northern, Eastern and Western Devon, South Devon and Torbay, and Somerset, have worked together to come up with a draft productivity strategy for the area, referred to as the Heart of the South West.

This has now been put out for a consultation, which will run until November 30.

The partnership is said to be seeking the views of businesses, organisations, groups and individuals.

It says its ambition is to double the size of the area’s economy to £70 billion by 2036 and is seeking the right interventions and Government backing to achieve this.

The partnership says the area has ‘unprecedented opportunities’ in sectors including nuclear, marine, rural productivity, health and care, aerospace and advanced engineering, and data analytics.

Councillor Paul Diviani, deputy chair of the prospective joint committee of the leaders of the Heart of the South West, said: “The Heart of the South West economy is larger than that of Birmingham, so we need to be recognised for our true potential as a cohesive economic area.

“Our vision is for all parts of the Heart of the South West to become more prosperous, enabling people to have a better quality of life and higher living standards.

“To achieve that, we have to create a more vibrant and competitive economy where the benefits can be shared by everyone, and by working in partnership we can present a stronger proposition.

“We urge our stakeholders in business and the wider community to give us their views and help us create an effective strategy for delivery.”

The results from the consultation will be considered by the joint committee of the leaders of the Heart of the South West and the Heart of the South West LEP board, before a final productivity strategy is agreed early in 2018.

The consultation documents are available to view on Torbay Council’s website at

http://www.torbay.gov.uk/devolution.

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/south-west-business-plan-up-for-consultation-1-5242862

Independent East Devon Alliance councillors spearhead rethink on Port Royal development

“Cllr Cathy Gardner, who jointly led the ‘Three Rs’ campaign to retain, refurbish and re-use existing buildings at Port Royal, said: “I’m delighted that the reference group has reacted to the views of residents and the consultant will reconsider their recommendations.

“The redevelopment of this area of town is important to all of us and a chance to do something wonderful for the town.

“The Three Rs campaign group will be working to encourage a community-based solution that makes the most of the heritage of the area without over-commercialisation.”

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/report-on-renewal-of-port-royal-unlikely-before-next-year-1-5238392

Exmouth “has too many retirement flats” – what, only Exmouth!

“The number of elderly people moving into new retirement developments in Exmouth is becoming unsustainable, town councillors have warned

Developer McCarthy and Stone is proposing 59 retirement flats on land to the south of Redgate, next to Tesco in Salterton Road.

Members of Exmouth Town Council’s planning committee were asked this week to reconsider plans for the scheme, which they had previously opposed, after additional information was submitted by the developer about why permission should be granted, on subjects including flood risk and land use policy.

However, councillors voted to continue their previous objections, which were on the grounds that site had been allocated as employment land in the East Devon Local Plan, and they felt Exmouth had reached ‘saturation point’ with developments of this type.

Councillor Brenda Taylor said: “All of that land up from Tesco is allocated as employment land.

“We need jobs here. I think we should again refuse it on those grounds.

“Years of work went into the local plan, and for what?

“They have got five or six properties in Exmouth already, and it’s a huge overload on our services.

“We can’t sustain these older people.”

Councillor Maddy Chapman said that an argument by McCarthy and Stone that employment would be provided by the development was not satisfactory.

She said: “When they say they are supplying jobs, and it’s going to be a care home sort of thing, the qualifications of people they employ, you cannot say it is a care home.

“For those number of flats, to say they are going to employ 15 people, you put them on a rota basis, and it’s absolute rubbish.

“Also we’ve got the other retirement flats being built up Drakes Avenue, so we’ve got two lots of flats going up. Who is going to look after all these people?”

Councillor Fred Caygill said: “If it’s not going to be employment land I would rather see affordable housing on the site, rather than I think probably the fifth McCarthy and Stone development in the town, which we cannot sustain.”

EDDC will rule on planning permission.”

http://www.exmouthjournal.co.uk/news/exmouth-can-t-sustain-more-retirement-flats-1-5235760

Exmouth Water Sports Centre: Grenadier’s three days of consultation announced

Grenadier is holding consultation events at Ocean in Queen’s Drive on October 21 and 25, between 9am and 5pm, and on November 1 between 5pm and 9pm.

It says the proposed scheme would provide training and changing facilities alongside an outdoor events space and eateries, and is expected to provide services throughout the year.

The initial plans have been called “uninspiring” and protestors note that the illustrations do not show the Queens Drive road diversion as described by EDDC.

EDDC: What they say, and what Owl thinks they mean

Council spin decoded:

PRESS RELEASE

“The council’s latest annual Working Together for the Future of East Devon conference, which brings together voluntary and statutory organisations, was attended by more than 100 people. Councillor Jill Elson, EDDC’s portfolio holder for sustainable homes and communities, who organised the event, said she was delighted with the high level of attendance from voluntary organisations, community groups and town and parish councils.

She said: “Volunteers are becoming essential as a means of helping ensure that people have the best quality of life they can, particularly with more people wishing to be cared for at home.

“Whatever support they offer, all volunteers make a difference and ensure that people’s lives are enriched and that they are not forgotten.” “

DECODED:

We are durned well not going to pay for anything you lot will do for free, so get your noses to the grindstone and save us lots of money to squander on our new HQ. Oh, and although we aren’t respinsible for social care we allowed our Leader to torpedo the NHS, so you’d better fill the gaps because we won’t.