EDDC: the resigned/sacked councillor saga continues…

Owl says: Of course, none of this would be happening if Leader Ingram had been prepared to work with the other independent group – East Devon Alliance (of which he had previously been leader – after being an independent independent – after being a Tory!).

AND it re-ignites the argument: who actually runs the council: councillors or officers? In theory, officers advise, councillors decide …..

“Cllr Paul Millar, who represents the Exmouth Halsdon ward, quit the Independent Group who are in control of East Devon District Council

A blistering attack on East Devon District Council’s management has been launched by a councillor who resigned from group running the council.

Cllr Paul Millar, who represents the Exmouth Halsdon ward, quit the Independent Group on Monday night.

In an email announcing his departure from the group, Cllr Millar said he found working with the Senior Management Team and trying to have any influence over his transformation portfolio to be impossible, that he had no confidence in the senior management, and that the Independent Group has little desire to change anything really at all.

His resignation from the group means that they are no longer the largest party on the council, with both them and the Conservatives having 19 seats each.

In a response, Cllr Ben Ingham, leader of the council, said that he thanked Cllr Millar for his contribution but that the ‘personal and unfounded comments’ do not help advance understanding of the work carried out by East Devon District Council’s officers and councillors.

It is understood that Cllr Millar had been removed from his transformation portfolio role by Cllr Ingham prior to his resignation from the group.

Speaking to the Local Democracy Reporting Service, Cllr Millar confirmed that he would remain a member of the council and would sit as an Independent not aligned to any group.

He said that he has found local casework immensely fulfilling and this will enable him to concentrate on that and he joked that his contributions to the cabinet wouldn’t be missed as his ideas seemed to be ignored and they didn’t give him anything to do.

In his resignation statement, Cllr Millar said: “Since being elected I have sadly found working with the Senior Management Team and trying to have any influence over my portfolio to be impossible. I was not once asked my view on any matter of policy or given information with which to make any real decision.

“I raised this on a number of occasions, and was sent an email by the Monitoring Officer telling me it is ‘impractical’ for councillors to make even a ‘small fraction’ of decisions.

“Although I’m very new, as a democrat I found this despairing and disappointing as I believe elected representatives are best placed to make decisions in the public interest. We take the blame when things go wrong, so we should have more control, as we’re the ones on the ground.”

Cllr Millar was absent from last Thursday’s overview and scrutiny committee meeting where the service plan objectives for 2019/20 where being evaluated due to illness, but had he attended, he said: “I would’ve struggled to explain what I’d done at the as I’ve not been given any opportunity to make a single major decision. I can only conclude this has been a deliberate action taken by the officer lead for my former portfolio.”

He added that he has no confidence in the current Senior Management and he would like to work with colleagues to at some point submit a motion of no confidence against the Senior Management Team.

He said: “I have become convinced by my short experience and conversations with others across parties that cultural change at the top is required if East Devon District Council is ever to provide a better service, win greater trust among our residents and to have fewer decisions made behind closed doors by officers who are unelected, unaccountable and often I believe show an arrogant contempt towards councillors.”

And he questioned whether the current administration in charge of the council was sustainable for much longer, and his departure means that the Independent Group, which was made up of 20 individual Independent councillors, is no longer the largest group, with the Conservatives also have 19.

He said: “My departure means the ‘Independent Group’ no longer has any majority and as a result to my mind no longer has any mandate to continue as the current administration.

“I will be voting against the Council Plan as I believe it is mostly a load of wishy-washy nonsense written entirely by senior officers, some of whom view our residents merely as “customers” to have money sucked out of, and underestimate the intelligence and ability of elected representatives. In its current form the plan gives the council and the current administration no clear direction of travel.

“Worst of all, I’ve been disappointed that the Independent Group has little desire to change anything really at all. I’ve never been part of a more autocratically-minded institution in my life, and my old Students’ Union was pretty bad.

“The leader and deputy leader have consistently bowed to the SMT (senior management team) in the name of ‘continuity’. It’s been so frustrating and there’s no active feeling that SMT want to work with councillors.”

Cllr Ingham, in response, said he was grateful for the work Cllr Millar had carried out and wished him well for the future.

He added: “It is very unfortunate when individuals resort to personal and unfounded comments. Such attacks do not help us advance understanding of the work carried out by East Devon District Council’s officers and councillors and their respective roles and responsibilities as detailed in the council’s constitution. Rather, they confuse, contribute to rumours and create more harm.”

“However, I am confident that the council offered Cllr Millar a high level of support and assistance to help him try to adjust to the demands of being a Portfolio holder, and I thank him for his contribution.

“On behalf of the council I am very grateful for the work that Cllr Millar has carried out since his election and appointment to the cabinet and wish him well for the future. Looking forwards, though, it is business as usual for East Devon.”

It is understood that Cllr Ingham had sacked Cllr Millar from his role as he failed to take the ‘many chances’ given to ‘show respect to officers and each other at all times’.

Cllr Millar’s resignation leaves the Independent Group and the Conservatives both holding 19 seats on the council. The East Devon Alliance hold 11, the Liberal Democrats eight, the Green Party two, and one Independent.

A meeting of Conservatives members will take place next week to discuss what, if any, moves they plan to make to try and regain control of the council.”

https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/councillor-quits-independent-group-launches-3313607

Who decided to sack “Independent Group” councillor?

LATE CORRECTION: Greens are independent of the Independent Group but Ollie David accepted the role as Lead Member for Environmental Health and the other Green councillor accepted the role of Lead Member for Health and Wellbeing.

How does a group of Independent Councillors sack an independent councillor?

We know how parties and alliances do or might sack a member councillor – they would have a committee meeting of elected members, make a decision and communicate it to other members and the councillor concerned.

But the “Independent Group” appears to have simply decided it was a group and elected itself a leader in the first week of the new council. As it then had the most seats, its Leader got to be Leader of the new council. Green Party councillors also joined the Independent Group (can you be even be Independent and Green Party?). It did not follow up with a committee or internal executive as far as we know, the Leader simply chose Cabinet and other roles for councillors – some of whom were Tories (eg Head of Development Management Committee) and one of whom was an East Devon Alliance member (Dan Ledger – Procurement).

So, did the Leader unilaterally decide to sack Councillor Paul Millar from the Independent Group, or were all of its members involved in the decision or just a small number of them? If so, were Tory councillors and Green councillors also involved in the decision (it seems unlikely the EDA councillor would have been consulted)?

Who initiated the call for the sacking? Were officers involved and, if so, how and why? Will the Monitoring be involved? Was the Monitoring Officer involved? Was the inexperienced, young councillor offered advice or extra training in his new role?

So many questions!

Who will get ditched councillor’s seat on “Queen’s Drive Exmouth Community Interest Company”?

Currently, directors are:

Ben [Correction: Sam] Hawkins – EDDC Independent Group councillor (Cranbrook)
Paul Millar – fired/resigned Independent Group councillor
Glen Woodcock – Grenadier
Grenadier Exmouth (whatever that means)

Source:
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/11017649/officers

It will be REALLY interesting to see who gets the challice! In the gift of Leader Ingham? Depends as Tories and Independent group currently level pegging!

More revelations: EDDC Leader now says he sacked councillor BEFORE he resigned!

This omnishambles story gets more complucated by the minute!

“An Exmouth district councillor who quit the Independent party and attacked the district council’s senior management was sacked from Cabinet, an email has revealed.

In correspondence seen by the Journal, district council leader Ben Ingham said he had already removed Cllr Millar from his role as transformation portfolio holder with ‘immediate effect’ the day before his resignation was announced.

Cllr Millar sent an email to colleagues in which he directed criticism at East Devon District Council’s senior management team.

In an email exchange, Cllr Ingham said: “It was necessary to do this [remove Cllr Millar from post] for a number of reasons over a sustained period.”

Cllr Ingham said he was forced to sack Cllr Millar as he failed to take the ‘many chances’ given to him to ‘show respect to our officers and each other at all times’.

Cllr Ingham said: “This left me with no other choice.

“As a result he has chosen to leave our group.

“The Independent Group placed much faith and hope in Paul Millar.

“We consider it a great shame he was not able to work with us and our outstanding officers. We will adjust accordingly.”

Speaking today, Cllr Millar said: “I was trying to make a contribution but I don’t feel as though I was given any opportunity to do that.

“There have been a few occasions where I have clashed with senior officers.

“It is going to take me a while to learn the ropes. To become a new councillor and be put on the Cabinet, starting straight away while having a full time job, is always going to be a challenge.

“It would have been nice to meet the senior officers to be briefed on important decisions.

“I don’t feel as though I could make important decisions. I am going to carry on as a councillor and try and learn as much as I can and do the best job I think I can locally.”

https://www.midweekherald.co.uk/news/cllr-millar-sacked-before-resignation-1-6262548

Former “Independent Group” councillor expands on reasons for resignation

Just one thing missing from Councillor Ingham’s justification below – why did he choose a brand new councillor to be an important portfolio holder?

Answer: because he utterly refused to co-operate with other independent councillors – many of them experienced – because they belonged to the group he formerly led (East Devon Alliance), preferring to appoint Conservative councillors or ex-councillors (he had also been a Conservative!) from the “ancien regime”, which led this blog to call the group “TiggerTories”.

As you sow, so shall you reap.

“East Devon District Council is in political deadlock after the dramatic resignation of one of the ruling independent group’s councillors.

Former Independent Group councillor Paul Millar, who represents Exmouth Halsdon, resigned today, accusing the district council leadership team of keeping him in the dark on important policy issues.

The council is now deadlocked with 19 Independent councillors and 19 Conservative councillors.

Despite this the council’s leader, councillor Ben Ingham, has said that, ‘it is business as usual for East Devon’.

Nub News contacted Paul Millar and asked him to explain his reasons for resigning, he said: “My experience was that in my four months in the Cabinet I wasn’t asked what I thought about anything, I wasn’t briefed, given options with which to make informed decisions, and attempts to have any influence over my portfolio proved to be impossible.

“In my first week, an email was sent out to colleagues “on my behalf” without me having the opportunity to sign it off or influence its contents. This really upset me because it suggested to colleagues I had formed a particular view on a subject that I hadn’t.

“Being new to local government, I would have appreciated more support and, ultimately, I came to the sad conclusion that some in the Senior Management Team simply don’t trust Councillors to make the decisions the people elected us to make.

He added: “I do respect that others may view things in a different way, but I guess I just wanted to be honest and I’ve been humbled by the number of colleagues across parties who’ve agreed with my sentiments.”

Councillor Ben Ingham, leader of East Devon District Council, has responded to councillor Millar’s resignation stating, ‘it is business as usual for East Devon. He said: “It is very unfortunate when individuals resort to personal and unfounded comments. Such attacks do not help us advance understanding of the work carried out by East Devon District Council’s officers and councillors and their respective roles and responsibilities as detailed in the Council’s Constitution. Rather, they confuse, contribute to rumours and create more harm.

“However, I am confident that the council offered councillor Millar a high level of support and assistance to help him try to adjust to the demands of being a portfolio holder, and I thank him for his contribution. On behalf of the council I am very grateful for the work that councillor Millar has carried out since his election and appointment to the Cabinet and wish him well for the future. Looking forwards, though, it is business as usual for East Devon.”

Nub News was contacted by East Devon councillor and chairman of the East Devon Conservative Association, Bruce de Saram, he had this to say: “Clearly Paul Millar doesn’t yet fully grasp the difference between strategic and operational roles on a council, which I find puzzling, given his previous role as an advisor to a Labour MP Geoffrey Robinson; you might have thought he would understand something of the democratic process and the slow pace of it at times.

“There is huge democratic input and the officers at EDDC do an excellent job on behalf of all residents of East Devon in what is a very challenging work environment. It is hugely unfair and inappropriate to criticise them when they have no right of reply; councillor Millar needs to understand that ‘changing the world’ takes more than three months.”

However in conclusion Councillor de Saram sincerely wished Councillor Millar well and said he looks forward to seeing him at future meetings as a “genuine independent”.

https://exmouth.nub.news/n/district-council-deadlocked-after-dramatic-resignation

“Exmouth councillor’s resignation from ‘sinking ship’ Independent group ‘inevitable’ says Conservative chairman”

Councillor Millar was councillor for “transformation” and was investigating the change to the committee system that Independent Group Leader Boris (whoops, sorry Ben) Ingham had been all in favour of – until he became council leader.

“Councillor Bruce de Saram said ‘others are likely to follow’ after Cllr Paul Miilar sensationally resigned from the Independent group, effectively cancelling out its majority at district council.

In an email seen by the Journal, Cllr Millar criticised senior management at East Devon District Council (EDDC) for not consulting him on policy decisions.

Cllr De Saram said that criticism of senior management is ‘hugely unfair and inappropriate’ when they have no right of reply.

When approached by the Journal, Cllr Millar said his comments were based on his own personal experience of the few months he was on the district council cabinet.

Cllr De Saram said: “Councillor Paul Millar is the first senior member of the administration to jump ship before it sinks, whilst blaming others for his decision with others likely to follow.

“Clearly Paul Millar doesn’t yet fully grasp the difference between strategic and operational roles on a council, which I find puzzling, given his previous role as an advisor to a Labour MP Geoffrey Robinson.

“You might have thought he would understand something of the democratic process and the slow pace of it at times.

“There is huge democratic input and the officers at EDDC do an excellent job on behalf of all residents of East Devon in what is a very challenging work environment.

“Councillor Millar needs to understand that ‘changing the world’ takes more than three months.”

Cllr De Saram went on to say he looks forward to seeing Cllr Millar at future meetings as a ‘genuine independent’.

Cllr Millar’s resignation now means the council is deadlocked at 19 Independents and Conservative members apiece.

The Conservative members are set to hold a meeting next week where they will discuss the party’s next move.

Cllr Andrew Moulding, leader of the Conservatives at EDDC, said: “It is too early to say what we will do.

“This could be the start of more people moving away from the Independent group.”

https://www.exmouthjournal.co.uk/news/east-devon-conservatives-react-as-councillor-quits-independent-group-1-6262323

Exmouth Journal: misleading headline

The headline is:

“Exmouth seafront regeneration talks to no longer be held in secret”

HOWEVER, as the article goes on to say:

following concerns over the ‘secretive’ nature of the new group, East Devon District Council’s cabinet agreed that while the group would meet in private until January 1, the situation would then be reviewed as to if it could be opened up to the public.”

https://www.exmouthjournal.co.uk/news/exmouth-regeneration-groups-talks-no-longer-secret-1-6258682

Not the same thing by any stretch of the imagination.

Still, Tory Exmouth town and district councillor Bruce de Sarum is now a member of the group and he has promised us all complete transparency:

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2019/09/07/tory-party-gangs-up-on-the-independent-group-in-exmouth-about-transparency-and-open-ness/

so it’s all fine – isn’t it!

EDDC Indie Groyp Leader adds critical Exmouth Tory to Queens Drive Delivery Group

Great – he wanted transparency so he will be reporting back to us on those secret meetings won’t he?

https://exmouth.nub.news/n/council-leader-responds-to-conservative-criticism-of-plans-for-exmouth

Tory Party gangs up on “The Independent Group” in Exmouth about “transparency and “open-ness”

“… Despite remaining the largest single group on EDDC the Conservatives respect that electors wanted change based on a manifesto of Openness and Transparency repeatedly promised by the new administration comprised of some of those elected as Independent Councillors, but that promised change has stalled already.

He added “Little has changed since the election in May where the new administration says that their first priority has been to provide continuity, which begs the question as to what the previous Conservative administration was doing badly that needed change”.

In the case of Exmouth, Openness and Transparency has been ditched pretty quickly where the new administration did not bother consulting with Exmouth ward members or key stakeholders about their half-baked decision to close down the Exmouth Regeneration Board, replacing it with the Queens Drive Delivery Group.

Plans to hold the meetings of the new group in private have been heavily criticised by other councillors for the lack of Openness and Transparency, as well as the narrow remit of the proposed Group. …”

https://exmouth.nub.news/n/exmouth-deserves-better-than-this—conservative-chairman-speaks-out?

East Devon Alliance only group submitting evidence to Parliament on Devon’s regional growth – our LEP just added its name to Cornwall’s evidence – for Cornwall and Plymouth!

East Devon Alliance submitted evidence to Treasury inquiry into regional growth: this wax pertinent, spwell-reasoned evidence. It was the ONLY submission solely on behalf of Devon:

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2019/09/05/parliament-publishes-evidence-from-east-devon-alliance-on-unrealistic-growth-figures-and-flaws-compounded-by-our-local-enterprise-partnership/

Cornwall and Cornwall and Isles of Scilly evidence (to which our Devon and Somerset LEP added its name only to a generic one-page “Joint Statement” covering letter) was skewed (as it should be) ONLY towards Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly and Plymouth – concentrating on them being in the same EU region (NUTS2), and therefore not concerning itself with any other part of Devon:

http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/treasury-committee/regional-imbalances-in-the-uk/written/104187.html

Our LEP simply duplicated the generic one-page covering letter in the above Cornwall submission as its only contribution for itself:

http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/treasury-committee/regional-imbalances-in-the-uk/written/104182.html

Local “Experts” win the day in the battle of Woodbury Power Plant (but the war is not yet over)

From a correspondent – as positive as it is, Plutus Energy will almost certainly appeal so we must await a final outcome.

“East Devon District Council has rejected plans for the construction of 20 gas-fired electricity generators on grounds including that the scheme would be “inappropriate development in the open countryside”.

Acting against the recommendation of Planning officer EDDC`s Development Management committee, refused permission for the construction of “20 self-contained natural gas engine driven electricity generators”.

The scheme, proposed by applicant Plutus Energy, would have been built on land close to Woodbury Business Park, Woodbury.

The Key to the decision was Strategy 39 of the council’s local plan, which states the authority’s commitment to promoting the use of renewables and low carbon energy, as grounds for refusing the plans.

The planning report said that the proposed development “would be powered by natural gas and therefore it is important to recognise that this technology is a “facilitator of renewable energy” rather than a renewable technology or low carbon energy project itself and therefore there is little direct policy support within Strategy 39 for this proposal.”

However, it added that “whilst Strategy 39 of the local plan promotes renewable and low carbon energy, it does not in itself provide an “in principle” reason to refuse proposals for fossil fuel energy development.

Therefore, on balance, the Planning Officer considered that the adverse impacts from the scheme would “not significantly or demonstrably outweigh the benefits that would be derived from the scheme which would support the delivery of renewable and low carbon energy by providing back-up generation to help achieve the transition to a sustainable, low carbon future.”

However a team of local residents including an expert from commercial finance, a Professor who is recognised as a world expert of climate change, a solicitor, local councillors, planning experts spoke at the planning meeting with a very detailed forensic exposé of the proposed development that exposed that the far from “facilitating renewable energy it was would block any renewable energy being added to the National Grid, and rather than running at “only a few hours a day in winter time it would actually run over 3000 Hours a year, having a devastating effect on the area.

After a short debate, where the Legal Officer of the council recommended a referral because of the further information the committee voted against the proposal and the Legal Officers recommendation.

A statement from the council said the application had “proved controversial with the local community who raised a number of concerns regarding noise and pollution from the facility, as well as fears that a low carbon energy generation and storage facility was not being proposed, which would be consistent with addressing the climate change emergency declared by the council only a few weeks earlier.”

It added that the committee resolved to refuse the application on the basis that “it would be inappropriate development in the open countryside, with local plan policies only supporting renewable and low carbon energy projects in the open countryside” and a further reason for “related to concerns about the impact of the proposal on air quality in the locality.”

Parliament publishes evidence from East Devon Alliance on unrealistic growth figures and flaws compounded by our Local Enterprise Partnership

Presented to, and published by, the Treasury Committee on Regional Imbalances in the UK Economy Inquiry.

A top-notch forensic dissection of unattainable growth figures, plucked out of thin air by our Local Enterprise Partnership, and accommodated by our county and district councils without scrutiny:

http://data.parliament.uk/writtenevidence/committeeevidence.svc/evidencedocument/treasury-committee/regional-imbalances-in-the-uk/written/103800.html

Exmouth: Secret council meetings – a disagreement about transparency in the ruling group

An unworkable fudge agreed?

https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/secrecy-concerns-over-new-group-3287544

“How ‘basic’ Cranbrook has gone from pioneering new town to almost unfit for purpose”

Anyone remember the “good old days” when the likes of Diviani, Twiss, Thomas and others extolled the virtues of the “new” town – and even got themselves not one but TWO awards for it? Many people wondered how that had come about at the time!
https://www.theexeterdaily.co.uk/news/uk-news/two-national-awards-cranbrook

Devon County Council pointed out its flaws FIVE ago in a 2014 in a damning reporht which identified ALL its current problems, but no-one at EDDC listened:
https://eastdevonwatch.org/2015/09/14/what-mainstream-media-isnt-telling-you-about-that-dcc-cranbrook-report/

Now the price is being paid – this is what you get when your government and your council is developer-led.

And what does the current council leader suggest: ANOTHER talking shop!

Owl thinks a few heads should roll first for the mess the council finds itself in … starting with lead officers CEO Mark Williams and Deputy CEO Richard Cohen who have masterminded the omnishambles …

“… East Devon District Council’s cabinet on Wednesday night heard that the legal agreement that plays a critical role in establishing the trigger points for the delivery of facilities has become ‘an inflexible legal document which was negotiated in a different financial era’ and some of the facilities were ‘no longer fit for purpose’.

Among the current obligations is the Cranbrook Consortium must provide a children’s centre at 2,500 occupations. Devon County Council has now served notice on the consortium and requires them to design, construct and complete them by either June 10, 2021, or when 2,500 homes are occupied.

Andy Wood, projects director, told the meeting: “We are therefore in danger of defaulting to a scenario that may not be fit for purpose or affordable over the longer term. Given the looming trigger points we are rapidly approaching the point of no return. …”

https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/how-basic-cranbrook-gone-pioneering-3288218

Secret “Exmouth Regeneration Board” to be replaced by secret “Exmouth Queen’s Drive Delivery Group”

Owl says: Oh, those promises of transparency … so transparently broken!

… The Group will meet a minimum of four times in a year, in private, to ensure that confidential or commercially sensitive matters can be discussed, but meeting notes will be published through the council’s Cabinet papers. …

https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/plans-future-exmouth-seafront-revealed-3276852

Carters Woodbury power plant refused by EDDC Development Management Committee

Of course, it will be appealed – too much profit (for them, not the village) at stake :

East Devon councillors have rejected plans for a power plant near Exeter.

Plutus Energy Limited had proposed building 20 generators near Woodbury Business Park in a bid to provide additional power to nearby homes and businesses at peak times.

Campaigners against the plans said the system would be extremely harmful to the environment, pumping out 60,000 tonnes of carbon emissions per year.

Before the meeting, Plutus had told the BBC the development was “not a renewable technology, but an essential component in supporting the increase in renewable and low carbon energy”.

About 100 people attended the meeting which saw it turned down.

A planning report recommended approval of the scheme, with conditions. There were also suggestions the decision be deferred for further investigation.

However, councillors said they had heard enough to be concerned the scheme went against the local plan and against the authority’s declared climate emergency.

Ten councillors refused it, while three voted for a deferral.”

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-england-devon-49494877?

“40% of local government audits were not completed by 31 July”

“The pressure has been on external auditors this Summer. The first year of the new Public Sector Audit Appointments (PSAA) contracts, with fees cut by 23%, reshuffled appointments, and firms starting work in regions where they previously had no presence. The second year of an over-tightly compressed audit season. The hot breath of regulators on the necks of those firms whose commercial colleagues have been involved in recent headline audit failings.

It has therefore been expected for some time that in August we would be talking about failures to meet the target date for the publication of the audited statement of accounts. But the news that 40% of local government audits were not completed by 31 July is still something of a shock.

It is important to confirm that an authority missing the 31 July target date has not broken any laws. Regulation 10 of the 2015 Accounts and Audit Regulations says that where an audit has not been concluded before 31 July, an authority must proceed to:

publish on its website a notice stating that it has not been able to issue the audited statement of accounts, and the reasons for this

when the auditor’s final findings from the audit have been received, follow the procedures for publication that would have applied before 31 July.

In both cases, the actions are required to be carried out as soon as reasonably practicable, so there is no need to rush to convene an emergency meeting for member approval of the finalised accounts. If key members and officers have booked holiday or there is difficulty fitting a committee meeting into the council calendar, then reasonable time can be taken to sort everything out.

There is no sanction for missing the target date. The worst that will happen is that an authority will become part of the statistics in PSAA’s annual report on the results of auditors’ work (but unlikely to be named and shamed unless the accounts are still not published by 30 September, if the approach in the 2017/18 report is followed for 2018/19).

There is also a risk of local reputational damage, but this can be limited if delay is not the authority’s fault by a precisely worded notice explaining why publication has not taken place.

But timeliness has not been the only audit issue in 2018/19. Our experience in providing technical accounting support to a number of authorities of all sizes across the country (and involving all the firms with PSAA appointments) has been that the burden of audit has increased in three areas:

the firms are becoming increasingly dogmatic about the technical treatments that they will accept

there is an increasing burden for authorities in training auditors in local government accounting

more work is being carried out to meet the demands of regulators rather than because it is necessary for an audit compliant with the Code of Audit Practice.

The common approach over the summer has been for auditors to inform authorities of the position they take on a technical issue and to expect authorities to comply with it, often under the threat of a qualified audit opinion if they don’t.

The problem here is not just that this is an inversion of the expected order of things – it is an authority’s responsibility to prepare the statement of accounts, making the judgements that it considers it needs to in meeting statutory requirements; the auditor’s role should then be to consider the reasonableness of what the authority has done. Where there is an issue that permits a plurality of possible viewpoints, the auditor’s job is to see whether they can construct a fence robust enough to be sat on so that they can admire the view on all sides.

The impact of the McCloud judgement is a good example. An insistence by auditors that the potential cost should be accrued in the financial statements. Reasonable arguments that the extent to which authorities might be required to fund remedies necessitated by government discrimination is too uncertain to allow any reliable estimates to be made being dismissed with a reiteration of the auditor’s expectations. Repeat of Step 2 with more reasonable arguments. Authorities agreeing to end the debate by amending the accounts, with little conviction that it is the right thing to do.”

Stephen Sheen: The state of local government audit

Sheffield holds referendum on return to committee system of local government

Owl says: Current EDDC Leader Ben Ingham promised to return EDDC to the fairer committee system when he was Leader of East Devon Alliance (that was after he had been a Tory and an Independent and prior to working with Tories rather than East Devon Alliance after the May 2019 elections).

Then, all went quiet. He has entrusted a review to one of his councillors with no mention of what, if anything, he intends to do when it is completed.

Petiton time?

Activists in Sheffield have used provisions of the Localism Act 2011 to require the city council to hold a referendum on ending the cabinet system and reverting to committees.

The It’s Our City group said it had collected 26,419 signatures – in excess of the 5% of electors required for a petition subject to be put to a referendum after verification of the signatures.

Two members of Sheffield’s cabinet have resigned so that they can support the campaign to return to the committee system, as have four councillors who held the roles of ‘cabinet assistant’.

It’s Our City said the cabinet system meant that only 10 of the city’s 84 councillors had a real role in making decisions.

The group called for: “A committee-based system, which is more democratic, and where all our councillors would have a meaningful say in making decisions.

“Some people might remember that the current system was brought in to make councils less bureaucratic and more streamlined and do away the with lengthy process of arriving to decisions. We are not arguing for a return to the old system – we want to see a new model that takes the best bits of both worlds peppered with a hefty dose of public engagement.”

Former cabinet member for finance, resources and governance Olivia Blake said: “My preference was to resolve the debate on the council’s governance structure without the need for a referendum but now that it is almost certain to be held, it is time to take a public position on where we go next.

“I will take the side of the people. I will back the committee system. It is a starting point for a wider debate on how to rejuvenate our democracy, and it is important that Labour voices contribute to this debate.

“I have added my name to the It’s Our City petition and will make further statements in the coming days about the role I intend to play in the upcoming referendum.”

The council confirmed the petition had been received and said signatures would be checked.

Previous referendums to mandate a return to the committee system have been held successfully at Fylde Borough Council and the former West Dorset District Council.”

 

“Stark warning Cranbrook is at risk of becoming an ‘austerity town’ bereft of key services and facilities for residents”

“Cranbrook is in danger of becoming an ‘austerity town’ with its residents deprived of key services and facilities, it has been warned.

East Devon District Council (EDDC) experts say authorities are at the ‘point of no return’ when it comes to delivering vital amenities for the fast-growing community.

They have now called for a task force to be formed to rethink how the new town can secure the assets it needs.

Officers have recommended that the authority’s cabinet approves the setting up of a Strategic Delivery Board when it meets next month.

A report to members says: “The original vision for Cranbrook was as a freestanding new community which would be capable of supporting its own assets and services.

“In a constrained financial environment, there is a need to actively reinvent how these will be delivered on a sustainable basis.

“Without this, there is a significant risk that Cranbrook will become an austerity town, bereft of the facilities and services that the population both expect and demand.

“This paper identifies that the delivery of key assets in the town centre is at a critical stage and puts forward a proposal for charting a clear path forward to ensure their successful delivery.

“The proposed Strategic Delivery Board is considered to be the best means to ensuring the necessary coordination and oversight.”

Some 3,500 homes have been granted planning permission at Cranbrook to date – with 8,000 earmarked. The town’s ultimate population will be around 20,000 people.

Town council offices, a library, and a health and wellbeing hub have been in the pipeline since 2015, according to the report.

The latter would cater for children’s and youth centre, primary care and leisure centre provision.

“The delivery of assets and services in Cranbrook is fundamental to the successful achievement of the vision for the town,” adds the officer.

“We are rapidly approaching the point of no return.

“This should not be seen purely as an issue relating to built facilities.

“Rather, it goes to the heart of how public services are delivered in the town to meet the needs of a young, growing population, including those with particular needs, both now and in the future.”

The report details how Cranbrook is key to the district’s housing growth and EDDC’s finances – through both developer contributions and council tax.

The council raked in £8.8million in government New Homes Bonus cash in 2017 and 2018.

Cranbrook is being delivered through a ‘commercially-driven’ model – with no public sector control of land.

A Section106 agreement – developers’ cash contributions for infrastructure – plays a critical role in the delivery of community facilities.

“It has become clear that certain of the facilities that are set out in the agreement are either no longer fit for purpose,” says the officer.

“Ultimately, there has been no resolution as to what form key facilities should take and how they should be delivered. Nonetheless, we are now at a stage where critical trigger points are being reached.”

The aim of the proposed Strategic Delivery Board would be to ‘focus on the delivery of future assets and services for Cranbrook’.

It would ‘provide oversight and ensure that the three tiers of local government can speak with one voice’ and comprise of two members from the town, district and county councils.

EDDC’s cabinet will consider the report on September 4.”

Stark warning Cranbrook is at risk of becoming an ‘austerity town’ bereft of key services and facilities for residents