Following EDA

As you will have noticed, the East Devon Alliance has grabbed the headlines, and been prominently featured in the local press and radio over the past week or so.
Now this invitation has come from EDA, for any EDWatchers who might like to follow EDA news for themselves:

There are 4 options:
a. Subscribe to emails on the site – http://www.eastdevonalliance.org.uk
b. Subscribe to RSS on the site – http://www.eastdevonalliance.org.uk
c. Like EDA on Facebook – EastDevonAlliance
d. Follow on Twitter – EDevonAlliance

And if anything specially grabs EDWatchers’ attention, it can be shared with neighbours and local friends by:

a. Forwarding the email
b. Clicking the share buttons on the EDA website
c. Sharing EDA posts with friends on facebook.
d. Re-tweeting.

……There seems to be lots going on!!

‘Democracy Day’ today, 20th Jan 2015.

‘Why Democracy?’ was discussed in a wide-ranging and perceptive debate led by Professor Michael Sandel, on Radio 4’s ‘Public Philosopher’ programme this morning.
The current changing mood of the electorate was one of the main topics that arose. Among possible reasons given for this change, were the failure of government to react to public views; a feeling of disempowerment; and the erosion of public spaces (in all senses). Here’s the link to what was said: http://www.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/series/r4sandel

The importance of proper scrutiny was implied. When EDDC’s Overview & Scrutiny Committee next meet this Thursday (6.30pm at Knowle) they will no doubt bear this in mind.

Happy 10th birthday Freedom of Information Act!

The Ministry of Justice has put out a press release saying what an important job the Freedom of Information Act is doing.

We think East Devon Diatrict Council might disagree!

“FOI is not only about the high-profile, headline-making releases of information but about the right of the individual to find out about the issues that matter to them. It is a fundamental right of all citizens to be able to hold their Government to account and that is why transparency is vital.”

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=21256:ministry-of-justice-hails-impact-of-foi-legislation-on-10th-anniversary&catid=59&Itemid=27

New Year, new Freedom of Information requests

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/opportunities_for_service_provis
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/full_access_to_the_alder_king_re
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/access_to_the_accommodation_ques
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/access_to_the_full_report_to_the
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/access_to_statistical_justificat
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/full_access_to_kensington_taylor
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/access_to_contracts_for_alder_ki

Information Commissioner v EDDC: are press releases and FAQ web pages “public consultation”?

Readers will be aware that only 2 “public consultation” events have ever neen organised regarding Knowle relocation – a very brief and rather uninformative event in Sidmouth and a highly stage-managed “stakeholders meeting” at Exeter Airport.

However, it seems that EDDC believes that highly stage-managed press releases with only good news and a highly stage-managed Frequently Asked Questions page on their website where they choose all the questions is all the public consultation required.

Why are we not surprised?

http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/Decision-East-Devon-District-Council-publish/story-25781816-detail/story.html

EDDC Tory party line on omnishambles: East Devon is “sovereign”

Response sent to a correspondent by EDDC councillor Peter Sullivan on the EDDC omnishambles. You can see the original request at the end of this post.

Interestingly, the reply was copied by Councillor Sullivan to EDDC councillor Phil “I am not and never have been a Whip” Twiss, who responded:

“Thanks for cutting to the chase on this one Peter and saying it as it is”.

Here is the reply, below is the original request for information. You be the judge – if we are a sovereign state. (NB: our bold text)

Definition: “sovereign”: 1. One that exercises supreme, permanent authority, especially in a nation or other governmental unit, as:
a. A king, queen, or other noble person who serves as chief of state; a ruler or monarch.
b. A national governing council or committee.
2. A nation that governs territory outside its borders.
3. A gold coin formerly used in Great Britain.

Dear [Correspondent]

“A memorandum of understanding has been put together which is a starter for taking forward shared services. It will put document on the table which we can now debate within the council and which can go through the democratic process. Without a document on the table there is nothing to discuss.

For as long as I have been a member there have been calls from all political parties for greater links between neighbouring councils I just see this as an on-going process.

In other areas of the country councils are coming together forming combined authorities and attracting considerable financial investment. Although this is not Unitary if that is your concern – the reorganisation into unitary will cost millions, it was about £120M + on-going costs in Cornwall’s case and they are now devolving to 19 regions within the county.

It’s about working together and maintaining our own sovereignty.

As for Sky Park and Manstone this was and has been going through a continuous evaluation recently and this has always been the stated position, as we all know this was only a preferred option not the final agreement as with any business case no decision will be made until ALL the relevant facts and figures are known and with member discussion.

I can remember a major exercise like this with a previous employer who had eventually to look at three different new locations / options for a new HQ, interestingly though it was the Board that made the final decision, the shareholders and workforce and public (even though there was public finances involved ) were informed after the event.

I believe we are being a lot more open and democratic with the way we are moving forward with our future plans.

As you know these issues will be discussed in future council meeting.

Peter Sullivan
[Conservative councillor for Sidmouth Town ward]

This was in response to this enquiry:

Councillors, (also sent to Cllrs Kerridge and Newth)

Three decisions with potentially major consequences for the people of east Devon have been announced by EDDC this week.

1. An agreement has been signed for ever closer union with Exeter and Teignbridge councils.

2. Skypark has been abandoned as a potential site for a new council HQ.

3. The Manstone depot may now be retained as an employment site and accommodate depot facilities currently based at Knowle

I can find no record of any Council, Cabinet, Working Party or sub-committee at which these proposals may have been discussed so can you, as my representatives on EDDC, please tell me:-

1. When and by what means did you first become aware of these decisions?

2. Do you know which Councillors or Officers were involved in making these decisions and on what authority they were published?

I look forward to your responses

[A correspondent]
Sidmouth

Secrecy has increased at Cabinet meetings: the evidence

In the EDDC council year 2013-2014 (May 2013-April 2014), the Cabinet met 11 times and three of those meetings had secret sessions.

So far this council year, the Cabinet has met 5 times and 4 of those meetings have had secret sessions.

http://new.eastdevon.gov.uk/council-and-democracy/committees-and-meetings/cabinet/agendas/

Why is regeneration in East Devon always secret?

The Exmouth and Seaton Regeneration Board meetings have always been secret. Many people have attempted to get their meetings, agendas and minbutes made public but no-one has succeeded, even with Freedom of Information requests.

And, when those meetings are discussed in Cabinet, they are again always secret.

Always the reason is “commercial confidentiality”. This has been the case for years and years.

So, all regeneration matters are kept secret between developers and the council – or rather a few councillors. We are not even allowed to know who exactly they meet with or why or what is discussed. Anything that gets into the public domain is sanitised “good news”. Any “consultation” is done against a backdrop of those few priviledged councillors and (presumabky) developers operating in the shadows until they decide what we can be told of decisions that have been made in secret.

By law, all items heard in secret must have reasons given in advance. The usual one (which EDDC uses for Knowle relocation and even the now-defunct Knowle Planning Application) is “commercial confidentiality”.

Who signs off these confidential items? None other than Chairman of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee – Councillor Tim Woods.

East Devon District Council – working for …. well, who are they working for?

What’s another word for secret?

Answer: at EDDC – think tank, forum, meeting, group, working party, board

All these words mean secret

as in

Economy think tank
Asset Management Forum
Parishes and town councils meeting
Capital Strategy and Allocation Group
Relocation Working Party
Exmouth and Seaton Regeneration Board

As stated in the post below, most of EDDC’s work now seems to be done this way. You can’t see agendas or minutes and Freedom of Information requests for information on these meetings are routinely refused.

Recall that, in its first incarnation, even discussions about the (failed) Local Plan (called Local Development Framework in those days and chaired by expelled-ex-Tory Councillor Graham Brown) were secret until an Independent Councillor (Claire Wright) forced publication.

How can you know who or what to vote for if you don’t know what they say or do?

Click to access 211114-the-knowledge-issue-28.pdf

Mark Williams defies the Electoral Commission

Mark Williams as EDDC’s Electoral Registration Officer (ERO) has recently refused to answer questions from the public about the conduct of local elections on the grounds that EROs are not subject to the Freedom of Information Act.
An email received today by East Devon Alliance, from Adrian Green of the Electoral Commission, makes it clear that Mr Williams’ refusal defies the Commission’s strong advice.
Adrian Green referred to a recent statement by Electoral Commission Chair, Jenny Watson, to a Parliamentary Committee, that EROs “should respond as if they were subject to the Freedom of Information Act. I confess I don’t really understand why they are not……….but we just advise them to act as if they were.”
Mr Green concluded “We…….continue to advise parliament that we see no reason why FOI requirements should not apply to electoral officers.”
The more naïve among us might wonder how local bureaucrats can get away with ignoring national regulatory bodies, but anyone who has had dealings with the toothless Local Government Ombudsman won’t be surprised.

The missing 6,000 plus voters: Freedom of Information request uncovers worrying developments

It would appear that, far from carrying out telephone enquiries in preference to door-to-door canvassing, the East Devon Electoral Returning Officer (Mark Williams, also CEO of East Devon District Council) did no canvassing at all for several years. Also that the Electoral Commission was aware if this. Indeed, we have no idea what canvassing was done before 2011 because EROs reported on their own performance with no checks or balances at all until then!

What on earth is going on? Will we ever know – as the ERO himself is exempt from answering Freedom of Information requests and, when asked by the Parliamentary Committee who his boss was he said “No-one”. Only the fact that the Electoral Commission IS expected to comply with the Freedom of Information Act revealed the true situation.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/electoral_registration_is_teleph

It would also seem clear that laws may have been broken but, if that is the case, that there will be no sanction as (thanks to EDA and Mr Freeman) at least 28 people are now out in the community correcting a situation that could have affected the outcome of recent European elections when the missing voters might have changed the result.

It should be noted that Mr Williams has refused to answer questions put to him by local residents on this matter because he says he is “too busy” dealing with the current situation.

It seems that, as canvassing is now being done , the Electoral Commission is happy to sweep the past under an already very dusty carpet.

How do you do a representative telephone survey when many people are ex-directory – and its implications for our missing 6,000 plus voters

http://www.middevongazette.co.uk/Poll-junction-27-development-flawed-campaigners/story-23972600-detail/story.html

an interesting point for us is the remark that:

“RDD uses the Mid Devon telephone directory as a sample frame for all Mid-Devon households,” he said. The latest figures from BT, which includes non-BT numbers, shows that ‘the ex-directory figure currently stands at 58% of people registered with the UK Telephone Number Database. Added to that the latest figures from Ofcom show that 16% of the UK homes are now mobile only. I believe it is fair to assume that this figure will hold true in Mid Devon, which means that one in six residents were excluded from the ICM study on that basis.

If we combine both factors by my reckoning that means only 35% of Mid Devon households both have a landline and are listed in the phone directory. To put it another way, the developers’ study excluded 65% of the Mid Devon population. That’s before taking into account the response rates, time of day they called, etc. but they won’t share any further details with me.

“It is quite difficult to imagine how the developers can claim that the locals are behind them when they excluded the bulk of us from their research.”

This, of course, has implications for our missing 6,000 plus voters missing from our electoral roll, since our CEO said to the Parliamentary Committee examining his registration methods, that his choice of using telephone canvassing rather than house to house visits, was superior.

How it can be superior in these circumstances is at best questionable. And we see from a recent Freedom of Information request, he has been asked when, how and with what resources and what results he conducted the telephone surveys.

The response will be extremely interesting.

Information Commissioner v East Devon District Council – update

http://futuresforumvgs.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/knowle-relocation-project-analysis-of.html

Knowle relocation documents withheld by EDDC ..latest update

See http://saveoursidmouth.com/2014/10/30/tribunal-judgement-further-delayed/

Scary goings-on at EDDC, as Hallowe’en approaches

This letter from  Tony Green of the East Devon Alliance, was published in today’s Sidmouth Herald, with the title, ‘Frightening stuff’ : As the nights draw in 18.10.14

EDDC councillors start to wake up

Rather like Sleepimg Beauty some previously somnolent EDDC councillors appear to be waking up after spending most of their time during this current council asleep.

They are popping up at parish council meetings (particularly to support current planning applications) and their photographs are appearing like a rash in local newspapers.

It wouldn’t have anything to do with council elections getting closer and still no six year land supply would it?

Would this also explain the sudden decision to extend Cranbrook by a further 25% from 6,000 houses to 7,500?

Speaking of which, a new wheeze seems to have made an appearance. We have heard of a local councillor asking EDDC for details of pre-application advice to an applicant and being refused and told to submit A Freedom of Information request – the due date for which would mean the answer (if indeed there was one) would arrive after the application had been to the Development Management Committee!

“(Merely) noting a report has no place on Scrutiny”, says Independent Cllr Roger Giles

But despite strong and specific criticism tonight, by several Councillors and the members of the public, of Richard Cohen’s controversial update on Knowle office relocation, the Overview & Scrutiny Committee Chair, Tim Wood and others voted …to note  the report!!

More on tonight’s O&S meeting to follow.

Information Commissioner v East Devon District Council and Knowle relocation updates

http://futuresforumvgs.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/knowle-relocation-project-latest-news.html

EDDC and transparency: the government sets its cats against EDDC pigeons!

The Government has just published an FAQ on the new transparency rules that come into effect om 7 November 2014. One or two of the questions and answers perhaps need to be highlighted to EDDC – particularly questions and answers 47, 66 and 81 below:

Q 23: How will the Code be enforced?

The Information Commissioner’s Office will not monitor compliance with the Code: it will react to complaints from the public under existing frameworks – the Freedom of Information Act and the Environmental Information Regulations7. In order to ensure that authorities fulfil their obligations:

 anyone can make a complaint to the Monitoring Officer of a local authority and remind them of their duty;

 the public can use the local authority’s complaints procedures;

 it may be possible to make a complaint to the Local Government Ombudsman where

other local authority complaints procedures have been exhausted;

 the authority could become subject to judicial review;

 the public can make a Freedom of Information Act request. Where the local authority

does not respond positively to the Freedom of Information request, members of the public can complain to the Information Commissioner’s Office under the existing Freedom of Information framework. As well as any issues related to a request, the Information Commissioner’s Office will consider whether the matter under the Code aligns with Freedom of Information obligations.

Q 37: Does publication of expenditure transactions exceeding £500 include all individual salary transactions?
Salary payments to staff normally employed by the local authority should not be included. However, local authorities should strongly consider publishing details of payments to individual contractors (e.g. individuals from consultancy firms, employment agencies, direct personal contracts etc) either here or under contract information. Furthermore, there is a separate set of requirements to publish details of senior salaries in paragraphs 38 and 39 of the Code. And, we think it is important that local people are aware of how much, in total, is being spent on salaries: the Code recommends that this information is published at least quarterly.

Q 47: How can my authority publish details of contracts given they are commercially sensitive?

Where local authorities are disclosing information, they must ensure that they comply with all existing legislation. However, the Government has not yet seen any evidence that publishing the details specified in the Code about contracts entered into by local authorities, breaches any obligations to maintain commercial confidentiality. Local authorities should make potential contractors aware that details of any contract will be made public under the Code to avoid any problems.

Q 57: Isn’t there a risk that the requirement to publish contractual information might deter suppliers from bidding for contracts?
The Government has not seen any evidence to suggest that this is the case. Whilst the point was made during consultation, no evidence was presented to demonstrate that suppliers will be deterred from bidding for contracts. And, local authorities must continue to abide by all data protection and privacy requirements.

Q 66: Is there a minimum size of site or asset for which information should be published?

No, there is no de minimis for the size of site or asset on which information should be published. Small tracks of land can be high value assets because, for example, they provide access to larger developable land.

Q 81: Should contractors employed by the local authority be included in organisation charts, published senior salary details etc?
The Code does not prescribe whether contractors’ should be included. Authorities must ensure that the information they publish gives local taxpayers a clear and accurate picture of the way their workforce is organised and how public money is spent on senior pay and reward. Within that context, it is for each authority to strongly consider whether to include contractors.

Source: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/360713/Local_Government_Transparency_Code_2014__-_FAQ.pdf

Details of the new council transparency rules

Click to access Local_Government_Transparency_Code_2014.pdf

Here are a few things that MUST be declared. There is a handy chart at the end of the document of required and suggested disclosure.

15.The Government has not seen any evidence that publishing details about contracts entered into by local authorities would prejudice procurement exercises or the interests of commercial organisations, or breach commercial confidentiality unless specific confidentiality clauses are included in contracts. Local authorities should expect to publish details of contracts newly entered into – commercial confidentiality should not, in itself, be a reason for local authorities to not follow the provisions of this Code. Therefore, local authorities should consider inserting clauses in new contracts allowing for the disclosure of data in compliance with this Code.

17.Where information would otherwise fall within one of the exemptions from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act 2000, the Environmental Information Regulations 2004, the Infrastructure for Spatial Information in the European Community Regulations 2009 or falls within Schedule 12A to the Local Government Act 1972 then it is at the discretion of the local authority whether or not to rely on that exemption or publish the data. Local authorities should start from the presumption of openness and disclosure of information, and not rely on exemptions to withhold information unless absolutely necessary.

30.Local authorities must publish details of all land and building assets including:

 all service and office properties occupied or controlled by user bodies, both freehold and leasehold

 any properties occupied or run under Private Finance Initiative contracts

 all other properties they own or use, for example, hostels, laboratories,

investment properties and depots

 garages unless rented as part of a housing tenancy agreement

 surplus, sublet or vacant properties

 undeveloped land

 serviced or temporary offices where contractual or actual occupation exceeds three months, and

 all future commitments, for example under an agreement for lease, from when the contractual commitment is made.

Parking account

36.Local authorities must publish on their website, or place a link on their website to this data if published elsewhere:

 a breakdown of income and expenditure on the authority’s parking account26, 27. The breakdown of income must include details of revenue collected from on- street parking, off-street parking and Penalty Charge Notices, and

 a breakdown of how the authority has spent a surplus on its parking account