Category Archives: EDDC
EDDC “new” HQ – rearranging the chairs …
Not everyone could hear so the chairs were rearranged:
From this? First Council meeting after May election:
And just now:
Improvement? Hmmm …!
This wouldn’t have happened at the “old” EDDC HQ!
Sidford Business Park Olanning Inquiry live feed:
“… Jeremy Upfield is the first witness of the inquiry.
He is a Devon County Council’s development management officer and will give evidence as the highways and transport case officer familiar with the site.
We are just having a pause to rearrange the tables so that the evidence can be heard by everyone in the room. …”
Might have been better and easier to use HQ 2 – Exmouth Town Hall!
Sidmouth Herald live blogging Sidmouth Business Park Planning Inquiry
What’s happening with the Greater Exeter Strategic Plan?
“… It is now intended to consult on site options and policies in the summer with a consultation on a draft GESP towards the end of the year and a revised timescale has now been agreed with Strategic Planning Committee. “
Click to access 180719%20item%2010%20Appendix%20B%20Service%20Objectives%20Q4%2018-19.pdf
Make of that what you will!
Grant Thornton – EDDC’s auditors – get more flack
Owl says: Good job we have internal auditors and an Audit and Governance Committee and a Scrutiny Committee …
“What is most perturbing is that the auditor being relied upon by investors [in Sports Direct – whose shares have tumbled] to navigate their way through the accounting miasma is Grant Thornton. It is jolly good that Grant Thornton is a challenger to the big four, but investors might feel more comfortable if the track record were more stellar.
Among its stunning successes were the audit of Patisserie Valerie, where tens of millions of pounds vanished, and Neil Woodford’s gated Equity Income fund.
Small wonder Grant Thornton has been put under special measures to raise audit quality by the enforcer, the Financial Reporting Council. Given the known unknowns, the 9 per cent drop in Sports Direct looks too kind. …”
“New PM given stark warning over future of local councils”
“The next prime minister has just 100 days to “save” local government, a think-tank has warned.
In their first 100 days, the new leader must provide a one-year emergency settlement for local government, drop the council tax referendum requirement and come up with a strategy for health and social care funding.
These are the recommendations from the Local Government Information Unit think-tank, whose Local Finance Taskforce paper was published today. The report is based on evidence taken from 254 senior figures in local government.
Jonathan Carr-West, chief executive of LGiU, said: “The next prime minister will have 100 days to save local government when he is elected on 23 July.
“At the moment, councils have no idea how they will be funded this time next year. They face a financial cliff edge on 31 March 2020 and currently have no ability to budget or plan their services for the year ahead.
“Some may soon be forced to take very difficult decisions, based on their worst-case scenario budget estimates – making redundancies, stripping down services, selling valued public assets – that may turn out to be completely unnecessary.”
LGiU noted, from its previous research, that one in 20 councils fear it will be unable to fulfil statutory duties this year, while one in 10 expects to face legal challenges due to service cuts.
The think-tank called on the next prime minister to set out a plan for local government finance that considers overall quantum, uncertainty and risk, adult social care, business rates, council tax and other sources of funding.
On business rates, LGiU noted that despite a commitment to moving to 75% business rates retention by 2020, there is still little detail on how this will be redistributed, and called for a strategy to published “as a matter of urgency”.
The council tax referendum threshold – whereby councils must hold a local referendum on decisions to increase council tax beyond 3% – is “outdated and ripe for removal” the report said.
“Local government deserves better and local government deserves more,” Carr-West concluded.”
https://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2019/07/new-pm-given-stark-warning-over-future-local-councils
Grant Thornton (EDDC’s auditors) delay Sports Direct results
Owl says: not the first of the big auditors to get caught up in new, tighter regulation and certainly not the last.
“Retail tycoon Mike Ashley spooked investors on Monday after bosses at his tracksuits and trainers empire Sports Direct were forced to delay publication of its full-year results.
The acquisitive group’s highly-anticipated results were due to be published on Thursday but now the City may need to wait until August 23rd to glimpse beneath the bonnet of the firm.
Fearing the worst, investors fled. Shares slid 15 per cent in early trading on Monday to £2.20 – near to a seven-year low and well below the firm’s 2007 flotation price of £3.00. …
It said that its auditors at Grant Thornton need more time to sign off the accounts due to increased regulation and also pointed to ‘uncertainty’ around the future trading performance of House of Fraser, which it bought in a pre-pack administration for £90million last summer.
‘The reasons for the delay are the complexities of the integration into the company of the House of Fraser business, and the current uncertainty as to the future trading performance of this business, together with the increased regulatory scrutiny of auditors and audits,’ the group said. …”
Sidmouth’s over 55 population expected to grow by 15% by 2041
Inly luxury homeowner retirement properties being built NOT affordable homes for older people with lower incomes:
Exmouth, EDDC and Grenadier – when does a gamekeeper become a poacher?
“Dear East Devon District Council,
[order slightly changed for clarity]
I am writing to request an internal review of East Devon District Council’s handling of my FOI request ‘Was independent advice sought on the governance of Queen’s Drive Exmouth Community Interest Company’.
A full history of my FOI request and all correspondence is available on the Internet at this address: https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/w…
Please pass this on to the person who conducts Freedom of Information reviews.
Councillor Paul Millar has made some attempt to answer this FOI via Social Media. He provided more detail to my FOI than provided here, in, as I understand it his new role as a director of Queen’s Drive Exmouth Community Interest Company and a Councillor. However, although he asserted this via social media and also announced that there was another new director, according to Companies House, Cllr Stott and Cllr Williamson are still in place.
Are you able to provide more detail on the £200k that Grenadier made a good business case for according to Councillor Millar? Are you also able to clarify the amount of interest chargeable by Grenadier on the loan and other charges that the company is making to the CIC.
There appears to be some splitting of identity here, that may lead to a conflict of interest. For example when is Grenadier acting as a commercial business and when is it acting as the majority shareholder of the CIC? Are you able to offer reassurance and evidence that a valuable community asset is being utilised for community benefit rather than commercial gain?”
When is a public footpath not a public footpath? At Plumb Park, Exmouth
Owl has been passed a copy of a letter (from the writer) sent to EDDC:
“Dear Sir/Madam – I have recently made several visits to this development (EX8 2JB) with a view to our family buying at least 2 purchases there.
On Wed 10th July at around 1230 I attended to see how work was going on and walked the public footpath through the site.
The public footpath runs SSE from Buckingham Close to the vicinity of Green Farm and is marked on OS maps as a Public Right of Way. The building works are all to the south and west of this boundary path.
There was no statutory notice saying that the pathway was closed nor was an advised diversion promulgated. Both these requirements are, I believe, legal requirements, to advise closure.
There were numerous signs warning about the adjacent building site, but from the safety of the public path I was better able to see the areas of build I was interested in. At no time was I in any danger from works vehicles. I passed several workers going to lunch – none of whom commented on my presence.
When I got to the end of the path/works I was rudely shouted at by an operative in a dumper truck who demanded to know what I was doing. I simply replied I was looking at the works from a public footpath. He became more authoritative and aggressive so I walked away on the way back. He then had the effrontery to demand a worker escort me “off the premises”. This chap showed me lots of notices such as “Do not enter site”, “Report to site office” but nothing regarding the public footpath. I pointed out to him the several small statutory yellow discs displaying “Public footpath”. But all to no avail.
So what is the position about this footpath? Why are there no statutory notices closing it – the developers Taylor Wimpey surely cannot unilaterally close it. Indeed is the footpath legally closed at all?
I would have thought a clear notice one way or the other is required.”
[author’s name and contact details given]
Tory Councillor blames Tory Government for abandoning Axminster and pleads with Parish and Swire for help
Axminster Conservative Councillor Ian Hall has challenged the area’s two Conservative MPs to press for more credible support from Westminster after the town suffered another in a series of economic setbacks.
The Conservative district councillor, who was re-elected to represent the town in May, despite his party losing control of East Devon after 45 years, says he feels the Tory administration in Westminster has abandoned the town.
This follows news that the Government has rebuffed Axminster’s application for help from a Future High Streets Fund grant at the second stage.
The former Conservative administration at EDDC applied to Westminster in March for Axminster to receive a share of the £675 million set aside as part of Government’s Our Plan for the High Street.
It became clear that Axminster had lost out when the shortlist of successful bids for up to £150,000 was announced last week, with the nearest places to go forward being Taunton and Yeovil.
Ian Hall said: “Axminster seems to be the forgotten town of East Devon when it comes to any kind of support from Central Government. There’s been a catalogue of decisions going against us, which have left those of us who are working hard to revitalise the town during challenging economic times feeling like nobody in power cares about us.
POSITIVE ACTION
“I’ve now contacted our two local MPs – Neil Parish and Hugo Swire – challenging them to press colleagues in Government to recognise that Axminster will be in dire straits if it doesn’t see some positive action”.
In March, Ian Hall described a Whitehall decision to backtrack on an earlier promise of a £10 million grant for the proposed Axminster Relief Road as a ‘betrayal’ because changing the grant to a loan rendered the entire Axminster Masterplan unviable.
Since then, there’s been more gloom for Axminster, with Goulds announcing an autumn closure of the town’s Trinity House department store and McColls newsagent in Victoria Place expected to cease trading.
An angry Ian Hall said: “Enough is enough. Axminster is fighting for its life at the moment. There are people in this town – and I’m one of them – working incredibly hard to keep ourselves afloat against really tough odds. But all we’re getting from this Government [HIS GOVERNMENT!!!] is one kick in the teeth after another.
FIGHTING
“There’s only so much people here on the ground can do. I’m fighting Axminster’s corner at district and county level. But our local efforts can only make a difference if we get support from central funds. No one at Westminster seems to understand the desperate position we are in – let alone care about it. If you take away people’s hope, why shouldn’t they just give up?
“I’m hoping the two men who local people elected to protect our interests [!] will start rattling some cages in Westminster. We will soon have a new Prime Minister and a fresh administration in Whitehall. I’m challenging our MPs to get Axminster on their radar and to secure some tangible recognition of our town’s fantastic record of self-help.
“Meanwhile, we also have a new administration running East Devon. I also challenge them to do their bit, as a matter of urgency, to help our fantastic town to thrive and prosper”.
Clinton Devon Estates and Newton Poppleford – a lesson from Budleigh Salterton
The people of Budleigh Salterton would advise the people of Newton Poppleford not to hold out much hope in acquiring a surgery or anything of benefit to the village. (see East Devon Watch 11 July) They have been down a very similar route with Clinton Devon Estates.
The failure of the BS Neighbourhood Plan to include all the hospital garden as open space, leaving only under a half leased to the new hospital hub left Clinton Devon Estates controlling the other half. A planning application was submitted for the construction of 2 open market dwellings and associated access in its plot. Like Newton Poppleford the estate lodged an appeal against the delay in making a decision by EDDC. However, the Inspector turned down this on appeal concluding that the benefit to the town of building two houses in the garden was outweighed by the negative effect upon the recreational space within this part of Budleigh Salterton.
“In the absence of evidence to indicate that the remaining garden would adequately meet the needs of visitors to the health and well-being hub, in relation to this main issue, the proposal would have a negative effect upon availability of recreational space within this part of Budleigh Salterton, contrary to LP Strategy 6. The proposal would not result in an enhancement of the retained garden and so would not comply with LP Policy RC1.”
So what did CDE do? Did this estate whose motto is
DOING TODAY WHAT IS RIGHT FOR TOMORROW
allow the continued access to this land which cottage hospital patients had enjoyed since 1887?
No, the estate chose to ignore the spirit of the Planning Inspectorate’s decision.
They erected a fence. I am sure many of Owl’s readers have seen the “abomination” (BS Journal Feb. 15 2018) and may have seen children confined to playing in just under a half of the garden.
So those patients living in Newton Poppleford and seeking to consult their GP will have to continue to travel to Ottery St Mary. (Remember that Newton Poppleford is within the Ottery St. Mary practise boundary, not the nearer Sidmouth!) If they rely on public transport there is no direct bus route, patients have to travel into Exeter and out again, a distance of around 23 miles with a round trip time of at least 2hrs 30 mins. (and don’t ask about the cost)!
“An election could happen at any time – electoral law needs to be urgently updated”
Owl says: recalling the mess EDDC’s CEO made of past elections (where he “lost” 6,000 voters), and when he was later forced to explain himself (not all that well) to a parliamentary committee:
this is LONG overdue!
“Last week, the House of Commons Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) committee published its response to the government’s Online Harms White Paper, where it called for urgent legislation to safeguard future elections. Echoing the ERS’s calls, the committee noted that ‘[w]ere an election or referendum to take place later this year, campaigns would be fought using electoral law that is wholly inadequate for the digital age.’
The government’s long-awaited white paper on online harms was published in April 2019 and offered a package of measures to tackle online harms (e.g. cyberbullying and disinformation) and to regulate internet companies who do not adequately protect their users. This would be achieved by establishing a new statutory duty of care towards users, which would make tech companies responsible for users’ safety online and tackle harm caused by content or activity on their services. Compliance with this duty would be overseen by a new independent regulator. Both the duty of care requirement and the establishment of a regulator were proposals included in the DCMS committee’s Final Report on Disinformation and ‘fake news’.
While it welcomed the (limited) measures proposed to tackle disinformation, in its response the DCMS committee said it was ‘disappointed’ with the ‘scant focus’ the white paper paid to the urgent changes that are needed around electoral interference and online political advertising.
In particular, the committee said that the measures included in the white paper to tackle digital campaigning were limited and did not address the committee’s recommendations on creating a category for digital spending on campaigns (currently parties and campaigners do not need to provide a breakdown of online spend) and a searchable public repository where information on political advertising material would be available.
The committee also lamented the fact that white paper did not acknowledge the risks of foreign investments in elections or the role and power of unpaid campaigns and Facebook groups in influencing elections and referendums. Regarding the first point, the committee will be taking further evidence this month on how anti-money laundering regulations may be adapted to digital campaigning, particularly given the use of online payment systems such as PayPal.
Despite the government’s commitment to extending imprints (disclosures stating who paid for and promoted campaign material) to online election material, the committee voiced concern about ‘how long it may take in practice for digital imprints to be enshrined in legislation’ given the government’s lack of urgency in addressing the committee’s other proposals.
The committee is therefore calling for ‘urgent legislation’ to be brought forward at once so as to bring electoral law in line with digital campaigning techniques, particularly with regards to digital imprints, and has asked the government to respond by 24 July with a commitment on this.
Most of the calls reiterated by the DCMS committee in their report on the online harms white paper have also been made by the ERS and our contributors in our report on online campaign regulation, Reining in the Political ‘Wild West’: Campaign Rules for the 21st Century, namely:
- Extending the imprint requirement to online campaign materials and improving how campaigners report funding and spending.
- Creating a single online database of political adverts, which would be publicly available and easily searchable.
- Ensuring that those charged with enforcing the rules have sufficient enforcement powers and resources that act as a meaningful deterrent against wrongdoing.
- Establishing a statutory code of practice for political parties and campaignersaround online campaigning and the use of personal data.
- Comprehensively reviewing our electoral law, ensuring that it is updated and future-proofed for the digital age.
Protecting the integrity of our elections and referendums is vital to ensuring public confidence in our democratic processes, and we welcome the DCMS committee’s calls for updating our outdated campaign rules. We hope the government will tackle this unregulated online Wild West with the urgency it deserves.”
An election could happen at any time – electoral law needs to be urgently updated
“Audit review raises prospect of new transparency rules for s151s” [Finance Officers]
“A review of local government audit announced by the government this week will consider new measures to give the public better access to financial information produced by section 151 officers.
Local government secretary James Brokenshire this week revealed the review, which will report next Spring, will be headed up by former Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy (CIPFA) president Sir Tony Redmond.
Brokenshire told the House of Commons this week that the review will examine the purpose, scope and quality of statutory audits of councils in England and the supporting regulatory framework.
The review follows concerns about the quality of local authority audits following the abolition of the Audit Commission in 2014.
Speaking to CIPFA’s annual conference in Birmingham this week, Brokenshire said: “Concerns have been recently raised about audit quality and whether the audit framework is too fragmented.”
But he said that restoring confidence in the audit regime needs to be accompanied by improvements in the way financial information is presented by local authorities.
He said: “As a result, I have also asked Tony to include transparency of financial reporting within the scope of his review.
“To be absolutely clear, I am approaching this with an open mind but our aim must be to ensure that the financial reporting and audit framework helps members, section 151s and chief executives to make informed and responsible decisions about improvements and is more open and accountable to our citizens.” …”
Audit review raises prospect of new transparency rules for s151s
Clinton Devon Estates refuses to meet Newton Poppleford parish council over planning application … rushes to appeal
Clinton Devon Estates … again … not doing its reputation any good.
“Clinton Devon Estates (CDE) says it was unable to find a tenant for the practice which was promised as part of a 40-home development at King Alfred Way. Instead it applied to build two further homes on the land.
On June 11 East Devon District Council (EDDC) deferred its decision for 90 days to allow time for talks between CDE and Newton Poppleford and Harpford Parish Council.
The parish has now shown an interest in renting the surgery and wants to enter into talks.
CDE has instead lodged an appeal against the delay in the decision.
The surgery was part of discussions when a 40-home development was granted permission. At the time district councillor Val Ranger said she felt 40 new homes, next to an area of outstanding natural beauty, was a high price to pay for a new surgery.
Coleridge Medical Centre was originally due to take over the new practice but withdrew its support after NHS funding fell through.
CDE has now refused to meet the parish council and said it was because of the delays already caused, current NHS aims to centralise services and the extra cost involved if the surgery is built after the bulk of the development is finished in 2020.
When asked if it would consider withdrawing its appeal, Clinton Devon Estates said in a statement: “A new GP surgery in Newton Poppleford is no longer viable without a commitment from the NHS to operate it. With the submission of an appeal, the opportunity for formal discussions between CDE and the parish council is now closed until a determination has been made by a planning inspector.”
The developer said Coleridge Medical Centre confirmed in June that its plans to consolidate services within a larger site rather than at branch sites was unchanged. It understood that their plans were to deliver services with the Beacon Surgery, Sidmouth.
When asked if it would be open to talks about the possibility of the parish council taking on the surgery, a Coleridge Medical Centre spokesman said: “We and Devon Clinical Commissioning Group are always open to discussions with our local partners.
“We will continue to provide the existing single-handed doctor service at Newton Poppleford for two mornings a week for the foreseeable future.
“We remain committed to securing high quality and accessible GP services for the people of Newton Poppleford and any proposals about how to best provide this in the long-term must take into account a number of factors including cost, workforce and sustainable modern ways of providing care.”
PegasusLife not listing Knowle Sidmouth as forthcoming development
Inputting “Sidmouth” into PegasusLife’s “current and future developments” website search brings up the nearest development as one in Bournemouth (Canford Cliffs) 70 miles away:
https://www.pegasuslife.co.uk/our-developments
And Pegasus Life appears in the last few days to have taken out a refinancing loan of MORE THAN HALF A BILLION POUNDS secured on its assets to provide capital for further growth:
Oz Real Estate completes £525m financing for retirement living company the PegasusLife group
“Damian Green: local authorities avoid care home developments”
Owl says: Didn’t stop EDDC flogging The Knowle to PegasusLifedid it! Though, of course, it will be DCC and the NHS that picks up the tab, not EDDC.
“Local authorities are increasingly reluctant to allow care homes and retirement homes to be built in their areas because they can’t afford the social care costs associated with that demographic, Conservative MP and former deputy prime minister Damian Green has said.
The chair of the all-party parliamentary group on longevity, who has produced his own policy paper suggesting a solution to the social care funding crisis, said it was a “quiet secret” that local authorities – who have to fund social care costs – try to avoid applications for homes for older people.
He also warned that unless all parties agree to seek a cross-party consensus on social care funding, a political crisis triggered by an “enormous scandal” will force them to act.
“We need to face up to these unpalatable truths,” he said. “The current system isn’t sustainable financially or politically. An enormous scandal will break and suddenly, there will be a political crisis. Cynically, it may be that we need something like that, but we should be able to avoid it because we know it is probably coming.
“Local authorities don’t want to become attractive places for retired people,” he added. “If things go on as they are, local authorities will become social care providers with everything else as ‘add-ons’ and the traditional things we all expect from them simply not existing.”
Age UK estimates that 1.4 million older people have unmet care needs. This is despite the average share of local authority funding going on adult social care reaching almost 25% of their total budget in 2017-2018.
Local authority budgets have seen devastating cuts under the Conservative government. Despite announcements of extra funds, and a £20bn boost to the NHS under Theresa May, the Local Government Association (LGA) has warned of an £8bn funding black hole by 2025.
Last month, Jeremy Hunt – the longest-serving health secretary in British history – admitted social care cuts went too far on his watch.
On a BBC debate for the Conservative party leadership election, Hunt said: “I think having been responsible for health and social care, that some of the cuts in social care did go too far.”
Ian Hudspeth, chair of the Community and Wellbeing Board at the LGA, said: “I haven’t come across any planning permissions not being put forward in this way but we’re very aware that the social care structure is at a crisis point.”
He pointed to a recent report by the Association of Directors of Adult Social Services which reported that almost half of councils have seen the closure of domestic home care providers in their area in the past year and a third had seen residential care homes closed, collectively affecting more than 8,000 clients and residents.
“There have been instances of care homes going out of business without warning and immediate pressure being put on local authorities to provide care and accommodation for their residents,” he added.
Green was speaking at a debate on Tackling Britain’s Care Crisis at the Resolution Foundation alongside Liz Kendall MP, former shadow minister for care, Norman Lamb MP, former minister for care, and David Willetts, president of the Intergenerational Centre.
All of the speakers called for a cross-party consensus on how to fund social care. There was wide agreement for a year-long programme of citizens’ assemblies and town hall meetings so the public could have their say.
Kendall said it was “absolutely a national imperative” that politicians create a cross-party consensus.
Lamb agreed, lambasting the current system as “completely dysfunctional”. It “fails people completely”, he said, criticising the government for failing to produce the long-awaited green paper.
A spokesperson for the Department of Health and Social Care said:
“People deserve to have a choice of high-quality care services wherever they live in the country. Local authorities are best placed to understand and plan for the care needs of their populations and are responsible for shaping their local markets so they are sustainable, diverse and offer high-quality care and support for local people.
“We have given local authorities access to up to £3.9bn more dedicated funding for adult social care this year with a further £410m available for adults’ and children’s services. We will set out our plans to reform the social care system at the earliest opportunity to ensure it is sustainable for the future.”
[Previous] council poor workmanship costs current council £150,000 to put right!
It is just a bit rich that the damage was done on the watch of the past chair of Asset Management – who is also the present chair and he now somewhat pompously says it must be put right!!! Er, if, as a council officer says “the survey wasn’t as extensive as in hindsight the council would have wished it was ..” perhaps this is one for the Scrutiny Committee!
“An extra £150,000 will have to be spent on resurfacing an Exmouth car park – because it was never laid properly by the council in the first place.
Improvement works, including resurfacing and construction of a new entrance, had been taking place at the Maer Road car park.
But John Golding, East Devon’s strategic lead for housing, health and the environment, told a cabinet meeting on Wednesday that when work began, it became apparent the car park construction was substantially poorer beneath the surface that had previously been assumed.
He added: “We have found that the construction of the existing surface in the vicinity of the new entrance appears to be made up of compacted stone with a thin veneer of tar and chip over the surface.
“Given the limited depth of construction, and surface condition, it is likely that the car park would deteriorate very rapidly once larger vehicles are allowed onto it.
“More extensive works comprising both new sub-base and a tarmac finish are required to complete the project satisfactorily. We already have the contractors on site and we can do the work before the summer holidays commence.”
He added that this would result in an increase in the total overall budget of £151,760 and asked cabinet for approval to complete the work.
Cllr Geoff Pook, portfolio holder for asset management, added: “We need to do this. We have to look at our assets on a long life basis. We need to do a proper job from day one and don’t want to have to patch in a few years’ time or have a car park that cannot be used by heavy vehicles. It is out car park so we in any case would have had to do something and bring our own car park up to standard.”
Cllr Jack Rowland asked why this defect wasn’t discovered at an earlier stage during the survey works.
In response, Mr Golding said that the survey wasn’t as extensive as in hindsight the council would have wished it was.
Cllr Ben Ingham, leader of the council, added: “We made a false assumption that we had done the job properly in the first place and that they didn’t need to check the sub-layers, but that was a wrong assumption.”
The cabinet unanimously agreed to the extra spending to resurface the car park to provide a good surface and base layer for 20 years.”
https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/exmouth-car-park-resurfacing-works-3082742
“The way in which East Devon District Council is run could be changing” [HURRAH!]
Owl promises to stop using the phrase TiggerTories (the close working relationship between current and past Tories and The Independent Group led by Ben Ingham and which excludes the East Devon Alliance and Lib Dens) if this ever happens!!!
And note that officers are already suggesting “hybrid systems” – gosh, they MUST be scared that a committee system will weaken their powers!
“A review into the governance arrangements of East Devon District Council is set to take place.
The leader of the council, Cllr Ben Ingham, had promised to fully consider alternative arrangements to the current leader and cabinet system as a condition of the support from the East Devon Alliance when they seconded his nomination to become leader at the annual council meeting in May.
Wednesday night’s cabinet meeting saw them unanimously agree that the overview committee should carry out that review.
Cllr Paul Arnott, leader of the East Devon Alliance, told Wednesday’s meeting it was a very welcome development.
He said: “This idea didn’t come from me but came from Ben who in 2015 made it a principal of his manifesto when he was the East Devon Alliance leader to abolish the cabinet and bring in the committee system. The proposals are potentially excellent but the devil is in the detail.”
“When the governance arrangements changed it was with the quid pro quo that the scrutiny function worked. But the scrutiny function has been a eunuch function in East Devon as many suggestions and motions have been refused or ignored by officers. In my view, the cabinet system is not working because scrutiny is not working.”
He said there were two winkles of the recommendation that concerned him though, as one was that the report from overview would come back to the cabinet, so it would be like ‘turkeys voting for Christmas’. He was also worried about the ‘due course’ wording as any decision on governance changes can only be made at the annual council meeting.
Cllr Paul Millar, portfolio holder for transformation, said that it was important that the recommendations did come back in time for the next annual council in May 2020. He added: “This review needs to be done fairly and to establish the rationale for change and if the preferred solution will deliver a satisfactory outcome and, if so, at what cost would it do so.”
The report of Henry Gordon Lennox, Strategic Lead Governance & Licensing & Monitoring Officer, said that if the council did agree to change to either an elected Mayor and Cabinet system, or committee structure, then they would be forced to stick with the change for the next five years.
His report added that there are also hybrid options where elements of the cabinet and committee system could be combined that the council could adopt, but it is the view of officers that it is for Members to determine why the necessity for change and to establish what the objective of the governance arrangements should be.”
https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/way-east-devon-district-council-3082739
East Devon Watch 