A national policy framework for independent candidates?

“Wednesday’s meeting in Totnes, organised by South Devon Watch to discuss strategies for political change, was inspiring and challenging in equal part. The inspiration came from so many committed people, all seeking to bring authentic democracy to a system widely seen as unaccountable, if not corrupt. The challenge is to find a way of beating the current system without repeating its manifest failings.

The meeting focused on independent candidates, both at local and national level. Among the speakers was Claire Wright, the independent Devon county councillor who came a good second in East Devon at the general election last year. Also present was Martyn Greene of the Free Parliament campaign, which is putting up serious money to support independent candidates at the next national election.

There can be little doubt that the tribal, adversarial party system typifies much that is wrong with our current politics. If independent candidates are to challenge the party stitch-up, however, they need to work together and show unity of purpose. The distinction between an organised group of independents, working together, and a new party, may not be easily observable to a electorate conditioned to the party system.

What comes first in politics, people or policies? If parliament were filled with independent members all operating under the Bell principles, it is likely that the quality of discourse and deliberation would be far higher than at present, but would effective policy, leadership and decision-making necessarily emerge?

One approach would be to elect government and parliament separately, the former on the basis of its policies, the latter on an independent, non-party basis. The current framework, however, doesn’t work like that: when people go to the polls they suppose that they are voting for the government they want. Government means a combination of policy solutions and the people with the leadership qualities to put those policies into effect.

In response to this, independent-minded political reformers could work together to draw up a national policy framework in they key areas of the economy, health, education, etc., which independent candidates could use as part of their campaigning message. Instead of supporting a party, they would be advocating for a coherent set of policies, the essence of which they would undertake to support in parliament.

In the trade-off between independence and coherence, it makes no sense for every stand-alone candidate to have to reinvent the national policy wheel. A shared set of policies could give national traction, provide a clear story for the media and ensure that the electorate have a better idea of what they are getting.”

http://www.martinwhitlock.co.uk/2016/05/a-national-policy-framework-for.html

Indie-town – coming to a town near you

Good feedback from Totnes – more to follow. In the meantime:

“WWW.INDIE-TOWN.UK
Based in the People’s Republic of Frome, we have been developing a website for independent politics – gathering ideas, videos and stories about independent politics at a local level, so all contributions are welcome.
Do check it out!
Good luck to you all.
Rupert Kirkham
Co-ordinator”

and

No Party will Free Parliament’
The No Party
Global Political Movement for Independents
There is No Party worth Voting for!
Taking the party out of politics
http://www.noparty.co
danny@noparty.co

Independents and minority parties grow stronger in Devon and the south-west

Good luck to our sister Facebook group “South Devon Watch” with their meeting of many, many local minority and independent people and groups, who meet in Totnes this evening, to build on the East Devon Alliance conference (“Who Cares What You Think?) last month.

Iceland’s “Pirate Party” by far the most popular based on recent polls

“The anti-establishment Pirate Party of Iceland has been awarded more funding for the upcoming general election than any of its rival parties as it continues to top nationwide polls.

The anti-establishment party, which calls for a 35-hour working week, direct democracy and total drug decriminalisation, has the lead in eight out of the last ten polls. They look set to form a crucial part of a coalition government in this autumn’s general election.

There is a pool of 290 million ISK (£1.6 million) available to fund political campaigning in the run-up to the election, divided based on February poll results. The Pirates were comfortably leading the polls at that time, and should scoop 35% of the funding pot, more than any of their rival parties.”

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/icelands-pirate-party-secures-more-election-funding-than-all-its-rivals-as-it-continues-to-top-polls-a7027606.html

BBC castigated for poor coverage of non-mainstream parties and independents

Extract from letter to BBC:

… “It is deeply insulting that parties such as the Monster Raving Loony Party have been given television interviews instead. Even the Abolish Assembly party which is not constructive have been offered the opportunity.

We know that unfair coverage of this kind and the deliberate exclusion of Independent Candidates has a negative impact on the debate and adversely influence the actual election. It is essential for the sake of democracy that all candidates have the opportunity to appear at all hustings and in the media.” …

http://www.local.gov.uk/documents/330211/1064611/Letter+to+Ric+Bailey/aacc9676-04a2-4c6b-9888-67e10e4e5ae1

The solution for devisive politics: more independents, says EDA

“Last week, elections for Police and Crime Commissioners (P&CC) were held across the country, including ours in Devon and Cornwall.

We would be grateful if you would allow us to propose that two key lessons must be learned.

The first, sadly, is negative. After the 2012 P&CC when the turnout here was 15 per cent, the Electoral Reform Society (ERS) said: “From the start, the P&CC elections were marred by controversy, with the government shirking its responsibility to provide voters with even the most basic information that the elections were taking place.” One of the ERS’s three key recommendations was: “Never leave voters in the dark about who or what they are voting for – ensure information on candidates is provided in mailings to voters.”

Cut forward to last week, and in Devon and Cornwall the 2016 turnout was still a lowly 22.8 per cent, artificially boosted by elections held on the same day in the major settlements of Exeter and Plymouth. We consider it has greatly damaged the reputation of the Cabinet Office (that little understood organ of control at Downing Street’s right hand) that they simply refused in the four years since 2012 to implement the ERA’s urgent suggestion for even a single mailshot, and hundreds of thousands of West Country voters remained in the dark in May 2016. Why?

However, on a more hopeful theme, there is in our view an immense positive to be found.

The Conservatives polled roughly 69,000 and Labour roughly 66,000.

But the aggregate vote of the two Independent candidates (Devon’s Bob Spencer taking about 41,000 and Cornwall’s William Morris about 22,000) shows us that even at an election when the party machines were cranking hard, a similar share could be gained by two Independent individuals working entirely from their own initiative, with slim resources, and having to operate across an immense area.

The country knows that we are stuck now with an increasingly divisive party political context until the general election fixed for May 2020. However, the more extreme parts of the Conservative agenda – from academies to planning, junior doctors to refugees – are being repeatedly confronted now by collective independent voices uniting outside the parliamentary system.

Last week, in our part of the country, the South West showed that even on a low turnout, the Independent cause is more than about just protest – we too can score in substantial numbers at the ballot box.

The question we now ask the region is this: how, for the sake of the next generation do we harness all this Independent goodwill and spirit to convert sentiment into candidates and candidates up to office at county elections in 2017 and for Parliament in 2020?

It seems to us that without an organised coming together of all independent-minded reformers as soon as possible, the Conservatives will ‘get the vote out’ in 2017 and 2020 too. Surely if ever there was a time for the Independent-minded to take up the challenge, it is now.

Paul Arnott, Chairman
Ben Ingham, Leader
East Devon Alliance”

http://www.eastdevonalliance.org.uk/in-the-press/20160512/midweek-herald-independents-need-to-take-up-challenge/

A new trend: city parish councils

” … With city residents being increasingly affected by public sector cuts, this may encourage more city-based councils to hold referendums to create new parishes. The appeal of a grassroots local government making decisions – even in urban areas – is that decisions are made for the community, by the very people who live within it. “Having local governors also enforces the view that the council really cares,” says Ball. …”

http://gu.com/p/4jv2n?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

‘New generation’ takes over in Axminster

Unfortunately, only at the Town Council, where scourge of the old ways, Paul Hayward, has been elected Mayor after long decrying the old method of “Buggin’s Turn” and campaigning strongly for openness and transparency.

At district level, the town, now a regeneration area because it has slipped so far behind all the other towns in East Devon (including Seaton) is still in the firm grip of long-time councillors Moulding and Godbeer.

After an effusive speech thanking Councillor Hull (past Mayor) Councillor Godbeer refused to be nominated for the post of Deputy Mayor:

Nominations were then taken for deputy mayor with Councillor Jeffery nominating existing deputy mayor, Councillor Godbeer. However, Councillor Godbeer said he was not prepared to accept his nomination.”

‘New generation’ takes over as Paul Hayward elected Mayor of Axminster

“Inspirational” first conference, a turning point for EDA Independents”

‘The East Devon Alliance of Independents (IEDA) has held its first-ever conference, combining with delegates from across the southwest. The event marks a turning point in the history of this new and important political grouping of Independents. ‘We thought we were all alone in our struggle,” said Kevin Bennetts from Cornish campaign group Yourkidsfuture*. But he and the 80 or so other attendees, from Somerset, Cornwall, Devon, including no less than 15 different locations in East Devon, showed that a strong sense of political cohesion is now gelling into a serious fighting force.

“Who cares what you think?” was the theme of the conference on Saturday 23 April, held symbolically in EDDC’s soon-to-be-demolished Council Chamber at Knowle, Sidmouth, and barely one year after 15 Independents won seats in the May 2015 District elections. “NOT a Party-dominated District Council”, was the answer which emerged, in pithy and polished presentations from Independent EDA councillors.

Councillors Megan Armstrong, Marianne Rixson, Geoff Jung, and Val Ranger exposed a catalogue of poor consultation, inappropriate development and sub-standard planning procedures, they have challenged respectively in Exmouth, Seaton, Feniton, Sidford, Woodbury Salterton and Newton Poppleford. One case study revealed a fabricated press story which threatened local vital facilities.

Graham Long, of ‘Broadband for Rural Devon & Somerset’ (www.b4rds.org/), added another powerful presentation on the serious mishandling by EDDC of the rural broadband rollout, despite his repeated warnings.

The afternoon session opened with guest speaker Bob Spencer – on his bid as a self-funded Independent to become the region’s new Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) with no party political ties, and on his belief that “The primary job of a PCC is to listen to the people”.

The conference finished with a penetrating look at the biggest issue on the South West horizon: the government’s plans to transfer big-budget decision-making, including NHS, to a partnership of local authorities and unelected businesses.. the so-called Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs).
Cllr Mike Eathorn-Gibbons Cornwall described how this has been conducted in his area in a reasonably democratic and transparent way.
In contrast, three East Devon speakers built a powerful critique of the proposed Heart of the South West LEP project for their own region.
David Daniel gave a concise overview of EDA’s report on Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs), just sent, on the advice of the National Audit Office, to the Public Accounts Committee; Cllr Matt Booth explained the wider South West context; and mindful of Shakespeare’s birthday, IEDA Leader, Cllr Ben Ingham, summed up with, ‘Devolution… to be or not to be? ‘ .

Following this first success, dubbed “inspirational” by those attending, more IEDA conferences are in the pipeline,in various venues across the District. Publicity coming soon.’

*Footnote. Link to Cornish campaign here http://yourkidsfuturecorn.wix.com/yourkidsfuture

Is two-party politics on its way out?


“The old order, while creaking at the seams, is still powerful. Winning a seat in Parliament or any public office without the backing of one of the big political parties is hard. It is a long time since the House of Commons had more than the odd independent sitting on the green benches. Most independent MPs have fallen out with existing parties, like Sylvia Hermon, who was in the Ulster Unionists, or Dick Taverne, who resigned from the Labour Party in protest at its leftward drift and won Lincoln at a by-election in 1973, only to lose the seat the following year.

True independents are very unusual: Martin Bell, the former BBC journalist who defeated Neil Hamilton at Tatton on an anti-corruption platform in 1997, was the first since the Second World War. He stood down in 2001 but when he tried to get back in a different seat, even his reputation as a white-suited champion of probity failed to dislodge the Conservative incumbent Eric Pickles in Ongar. Dr Richard Taylor, who was returned twice as Independent MP for Wyre Forest on the issue of plans to close the local hospital, eventually lost out to the Tories in 2010.

Even if the two mainstream political parties are in decline – with membership far down from historic highs and just two-thirds of voters backing them in 2015 compared with more than 90 per cent half a century ago – they retain a firm grip on the levers of power. This is true even at the local level, where opportunities for independent candidates are supposedly more promising. In Thursday’s contests in England, Conservatives will be defending control of 52 per cent of councils and Labour 29 per cent. Independents and smaller parties run less than 2 per cent of the total.

One area of public life that should be free of party political involvement is the election of Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs). When these posts were first mooted by the Tories in opposition the idea was that they should be filled by non-partisan candidates; but it didn’t quite turn out that way. At the first set of elections in England and Wales four years ago,

16 Conservative PCCs were elected and 13 from Labour. There were, however, 12 Independents, including eight former police officers, a senior barrister and an ex-pilot. How many of these will be returned this time is anyone’s guess. The Conservatives and Labour are putting up candidates in every area and three independents are not seeking re-election, so there could well be fewer than before.

The concept of city mayors was another idea that many hoped would be free of party political machinations; and for a while this was the case. When Hartlepool decided to have an executive mayor in response to the Blair government’s effort to push the idea, Stuart Drummond, the mascot to the local football team, won the contest as an independent. He held the post from 2002 until 2013, when the office was abolished after local people decided in a referendum that they didn’t want a mayor after all.

Ray Mallon was independent mayor of Middlesbrough for three terms until he stood down last year and Labour took the post. George Ferguson, the independent mayor of Bristol – the only one of 10 cities that opted to switch to the system in 2012 – is fighting a fierce battle against Labour who hope to win.

In short, independents have a hard time of it. If they get in they are inevitably at a disadvantage without the organisation and funds of the big party machines. Even the most famous independent winner, Ken Livingstone – who defeated Labour’s Frank Dobson after the party refused to nominate him as its candidate for London mayor – won a second term under party colours.

There is only one independent standing in tomorrow’s London contest – the Polish aristocrat Prince Zylinski, and he is unlikely to spring a Leicester City-style surprise. This is a shame: London should have a powerful, independent voice. Indeed, Boris Johnson, albeit a Conservative, sometimes gave the impression that he was in City Hall despite party backing rather than because of it. But as he pointed out on these pages on Monday, much of his time was spent ensuring that London got a good deal from central government, so it helped being in the same party. When all power is in the hands of the central state, the chances of independents getting anything done are slim.

But is change in the air? Next week, a new organisation called Campaign for a Free Parliament is to be launched, backed by £6 million put up by a group of businessmen. Its ambition is to break the party system by sponsoring independent candidates, chosen through primary competitions, who would each receive £10,000 to fund their campaigns. Their accountability would be directly to voters rather than party HQ.

Meanwhile, David Cameron’s former adviser Steve Hilton is also trying to shake up the established order by offering a digital platform that bypasses the main parties and the media. Crowdpac has been operating in America for about 18 months and describes itself as “the new politics”. Its aim is to “make it easier for citizens to learn about politicians, run for office, and to find and support political candidates that match their priorities and beliefs. We want to help end the stranglehold of big money donors and special interests on the political system.”

Is any of this really feasible? After all, political parties exist for a purpose: they offer a home for people with a similar ideological outlook – though, as is apparent in both major parties at the moment, not an identical one. Voters know when they put a cross next to a party candidate’s name roughly what they are getting. Moreover, if the Commons were full of independents, how would a government be formed and on what basis could it claim a mandate?

Yet there is deep popular disenchantment with mainstream politics so maybe we are entering the age of the outsider – look at Donald Trump in America. My hunch is that breaking down the old political order in this country is about as likely as Leicester City winning the Premier League next year. So you never know.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/03/will-the-grip-of-the-two-party-system-ever-be-broken/

Frome and “flatpack democracy: first “Anywhere but Westminster” video

“While Scotland has blazed a new trail, much of England seems to have stuck to politics as usual. In fact, under the media radar, a growing number of self-styled independents are trying to kick out the big parties and take over the parts of government closest to local communities. John Harris goes to Frome, the Somerset town where this ‘flatpack democracy’ movement started; and to Winchester, where a new grassroots grouping wants to overthrow the Tory-run city council.”

http://gu.com/p/4tnza

Be very afraid, East Devon District Council Conservatives – be very afraid. Old party politics is out, independent collegiate democracy is in.

First East Devon Alliance conference

The Who Cares What You Think? conference at EDDC HQ , Knowle, last Saturday (23 April marked a turning point for the new political group of Independents, established in March 2015, just one year ago.

They have now joined forces with colleagues from across the South West.

Background

The East Devon Alliance of Independents (IEDA) have been hard at work since winning remarkable support in the May 2015 elections, which saw the number of Independent East Devon District Councillors increase five-fold, to 15.

Since then, two major IEDA reports have been accepted by Parliament:

House of Lords Select Committee on the economics of housing in the UK and

National Audit Office (Local Enterprise Partnerships)

The latter report, on LEPs, has just been sent to a higher level, the Parliamentary Accounts Committee (PAC), at the suggestion of the National Audit Office (NAO).

Making a difference

Meanwhile, the new IEDA Councillors have brought positive change:

– raising the level of debate
– producing well-researched reports so that decisions can be based on evidence rather than party allegiance
– introducing proper scrutiny.

Full report on the Who Cares What You Think? conference coming soon.

“Anywhere but Westminster” newspaper column want to hear from us

Worried about the ever-widening democratic deficit in East Devon? Enraged by the secrecy and vagueness of our devolution deal? Fed up with an MP who will not speak about his constituency in Parliament and won’t even live in it? Celebrating the rise of independents at every level of local government in the district? Here is how you get it to a wider audience:

“Anywhere but Westminster is travelling the country to get a sense of British politics away from the Westminster bubble. During this period old fashioned two-party politics has been diminished and a palpable sense of unrest with the status quo has emerged.

For their new series, the pair are back on the road, hunting out radical new politics in some unlikely place. We would like you to tell us where you think they should go?

Share your views in the form linked on the webpage below or get in contact with John Harris (@johnharris1969) and John Domokos (@JohnDomokos) via Twitter.”

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/apr/25/anywhere-but-westminster-where-should-we-go?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

“Britain’s two-party political system isn’t working” – more Independents needed says former Conservative spin master

“Voters are disillusioned with a malfunctioning democracy. The system must change so independent candidates have a fair chance of election:

It doesn’t have to be this way. It’s clear that people are looking for a new kind of politics that goes beyond traditional party lines: a politics first and foremost of engagement and transparency, not reducible to the old left-right divide. …

… Change is long overdue. In the 1950s, politics was simpler. Workers voted Labour, the middle class and the wealthy voted Conservative. About 90% of votes went to one of these two parties. But by 2015, the combined total had dropped to just over two-thirds. Voters today are searching for new options beyond the two-party model. …

… In today’s age of nearly unlimited information, our world views are nuanced and sophisticated, but our creaking democratic processes struggle to reflect this. Where do you go if you are a Conservative on the economy, a Green on the environment, Labour on social justice, Liberal Democrat on human rights? That is not an unusual combination. But Westminster politics still pushes a false, binary simplicity. …

… Even if an independent candidate does get on the ballot, it’s next to impossible for voters to discover that there might be someone outside the two-party system who genuinely matches their views. …

… In today’s age of nearly unlimited information, our world views are nuanced and sophisticated, but our creaking democratic processes struggle to reflect this. Where do you go if you are a Conservative on the economy, a Green on the environment, Labour on social justice, Liberal Democrat on human rights? That is not an unusual combination. But Westminster politics still pushes a false, binary simplicity.

This is where the corruption comes in, because the principal barrier to a more open and diverse politics in the UK is money. Thankfully, it plays a far lesser role in Britain than America – where money from fundraising Super Pacs dominates campaigning. But even here, you need cash to stand for office, to run a campaign, to get elected. Who can afford to do that? Only the centralised party organisations. And where do they get their money? The same old sectoral interests – the financial industry on the right and the unions on left. …

… Even if an independent candidate does get on the ballot, it’s next to impossible for voters to discover that there might be someone outside the two-party system who genuinely matches their views. …

… If we’re ever going to see the kind of modern, responsive and open-minded politics that people are crying out for, we have to break the grip of the party machines and get more independent, and independent-minded, candidates elected to office, at every level of government. But such candidates face enormous obstacles. Only parties have the muscle to win most elections, and party insiders control candidate selections tightly.

The barriers to political participation must be removed and the stranglehold of the big party machines broken, so that the power can be taken out of the hands of the insiders, the moneyed interests and the Westminster power brokers – and put where it belongs: in the hands of the people.

http://gu.com/p/4tezd

Independent councillor sounds alarm bells on devolution

Here’s the gist of a warning from Cllr Roger Giles (Ind, Ottery St Mary), to fellow EDDC councillors before they voted on Item 7 HEART OF SOUTH WEST DEVOLUTION, at last Thursday’s Extra Ordinary Meeting at Knowle. (28 Jan) :

Governments regularly tell councils that they are keen to devolve powers to local government. The reality is that there is more and more interference from Whitehall in the affairs of councils. In spite of being 200 miles away, Whitehall thinks it knows best how local councils should meet the needs of their residents.

The latest Government claim to “devolution” is no such thing. It is a cynical misuse of words.

The Heart of the South West Local Enterprise Partnership proposal contains no additional money.

And there is a considerable democratic deficit. HoSW meetings are in private – the press and public are not entitled to attend. Neither are the press and public allowed to see agenda papers or minutes of meetings. It is a totally alien concept to councillors who rightly conduct their business in an open and transparent way.

At the moment EDDC provides services to the people of East Devon based on decisions made by 59 elected councillors. If the public does not like what its councillors have been doing it can vote for someone else.

If the HoSW proposal becomes a reality, major spending decisions will be taken by unelected and unaccountable business people. There is also the fear that most of the money available will be spent on major projects in Exeter, rather than in communities such as Ottery St. Mary.’

Without proper debate of these alarm bells clearly signalled by Cllr Giles, the devolution process was approved, though not “unanimously”, as EDDC’s initial press release said.

Scrutiny at its best … excuses at their worst … “corporate relations” (un)explained by Councillor Twiss

Last night’s Scrutiny committee meeting exposed two more examples of EDDC leaders’ instinct to make decisions without proper consultation.

The ubiquitous Cllr Phil Twiss (Conservative, Honiton St Michael’s) who, in addition to all his other roles, is portfolio holder for corporate relations, was summoned to explain why the democratic process had been so blatantly short-circuited by a council press release in September.

Cllr Cathy Gardner (Independent, Sidmouth Town) asked him why she and the other Sidmouth ward councillors had been taken by surprise by an announcement in the Sidmouth Herald that the Council was considering building affordable housing on Mill Street carpark. There had been no consultation with interested parties like the town council, and ward members were sent copies of the press release 14 minutes before it was published!

Cllr Twiss’ replied that he had not been involved with the release, (“It wasn’t me, guv”) but claimed it was a matter of urgency because a journalist had asked for a statement, and the deadline was pressing.

Cllr Marianne Rixson (Independent, Sidmouth Sidford) retorted that this sounded very much like “the journalist tail wagging the council dog” and it was no excuse for not consulting democratically before arbitrarily publishing controversial initiatives.

The Scrutiny Committee agreed and voted to remind Cabinet that there was a Protocol that councillors concerned should be consulted before press releases were authorised. It also welcomed guidance produced by the Communications Officer which made a similar point.

Silence remained about who had authorised the Sidmouth story but Cllr Bill Nash (Conservative Exmouth Town) may have been warm when he said only floods and other emergencies required urgent press releases. All other communications were non-urgent and should not be released if authorised only by “the Leader and senior officers.”

In passing, Cllr Nash also slammed the Council leadership for publishing detailed pictures and maps of developments along Queen’s Drive in Exmouth which were very different from any plans that had been consulted upon.

This was taken up by Scrutiny Chair Cllr Roger Giles (Independent, Ottery St Mary Town) who read a letter from two Exmouth residents complaining about pending planning applications for major works, including diverting Queen’s Drive, part of the latest, much altered, waterfront development scheme.

Exmouth Cllr Brenda Taylor (Lib Dem,Exmouth ) angrily commented that these plans proposed massive residential development which had never been agreed to by councillors. She felt she was “wasting her time” attending meetings when such arbitrary decisions were made in secret.

At this point the Democratic Services Officer and a Legal Officer intervened to argue that the Scrutiny Committee could not discuss the Waterfront Project because planning was outside its remit.

Cllr Rob Longhurst (Independent, Woodbury and Lympstone) wasn’t having any of this. “The reputation of EDDC is nil in Exmouth,” he said, because the current extravagant plans were being “justified” by a few hundred replies to a questionnaire about the different, more modest, “Splash” project.

Cllr Megan Armstrong (Independent, Exmouth Halsdon) agreed. “It’s not about planning, it’s about independent public consultation”, she said. It was about whether the people of Exmouth wanted or needed what the Council leadership was imposing on them.

Cllr Val Ranger (Independent, Newton Poppleford and Harpford) said it was quite within the remit of Scrutiny to look at questions of process, on “whether public consultation is being properly followed.”

The committee voted to do precisely that, once the current legal actions over Exmouth seafront businesses are resolved.

In the meantime, watch out for fireworks over Exmouth seafront at the full Council meeting on Wednesday 16th December.

Independent councillors get creative (and help charity) at Mill Street car park, Sidmouth

” … EDDC chief executive Mark Williams replied that Mill Street car park would not be developed ‘for the foreseeable future’ – before clarifying that he meant ‘the next two or three years’.

Opening Mill Street for a local cause was the brainchild of Sidmouth councillors Cathy Gardner, John Dyson and Matt Booth.

Councillor Iain Chubb, portfolio holder for the environment, said: “Having a car park with unoccupied spaces is of benefit to no-one, so it makes sense to take the opportunity to test public demand for reserved off-street car parking and at the same time use this exercise to help a terrific cause.”

He said the move will ensure the spaces are not wasted while EDDC prepares to implement a pay and display system next year.

Rotary club treasurer Bill Titley welcomed the donations.

He said it will be spent on the volunteers’ various projects supporting elderly and youth groups locally.

The council’s business support team will collect donations and issue permits lasting one, two or three weeks.

Anyone interested in applying for one should call 01395 571780 or email carparks@eastdevon.gov.uk”

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/mill_street_cash_to_boost_rotary_club_of_sidmouth_1_4336831

Two Successes but a thumping Failure for Chardstock at yesterday’s Scrutiny Committee

Two successes for EDA Independent councillors’ campaign for openness and democracy at last night’s EDDC Scrutiny Committee Meeting –and a thumping failure.

At the suggestion of EDA Independent councillor Ben Ingham, the committee unanimously recommended that the shadowy activities of the secretive Asset Management Forum should be dragged into the light. They agreed that Forum meetings from now should be minuted and open to press and public.

They also unanimously approved “best practice” recommendations from a recent Government training session for scrutiny committees.

In fact, EDA Independent councillor Marion Rixson was praised for having already pre-empted the recommendation that individual councillors should do detailed research into topics of concern. Her comparative study of different councils’ management of beach huts was crucial in influencing the EDDC’s recent decision to scrap its plan to auction the rental of its beach huts to the highest bidder.

Sadly the Committee was unable to shine a light on the scandalous Chardstock affair.

Two speakers expressed their frustration and disappointment that the Committee could not scrutinise the dubious way in which their small, isolated community had been declared suitable for large scale development in the Local Plan.

If any village in East Devon in “unsustainable” it’s Chardstock with its few facilities and poor access. The Parish Council thought so, EDDC’s planning officers thought so. But at an Extraordinary Council Meeting on March 25, called to finalise the Local Plan, Chardstock was designated “sustainable”!

Grave doubts have been expressed about the process that led to this astonishing decision. A member of the public, who many assumed was a Chardstock councillor, spoke strongly in favour of designation as sustainable. He was later identified as a developer, not resident in the village.

Deputy Leader Andrew Moulding spoke eloquently in his support – and a majority of the Council agreed to re-designate the unfortunate village.

To many observers, including Independent councillors, this appeared to be a shameful manipulation, and an earlier meeting of the Scrutiny Committee had agreed to investigate the process.

Last night it emerged that the Council’s Legal Officer had advised that the Scrutiny Committee should not discuss the matter until the Inspector had ruled on the Local Plan. By which time it would be impossible to change Chardstock’s designation!

The Legal Officer did not attend, and it was left to a deputy to try justify the decision.

In frustration, one of the Chardstock councillors accused the Committee of kicking the Chardstock scandal “into the long grass”. Chair Roger Giles denied it, and said it would be investigated whenever the Inspector had made his decision.

EDA Independent councillor Cathy Gardner said she was embarrassed to be a member of the Scrutiny Committee which had let down the public.

There’s obviously work to do before all the dark corners of EDDC are open to daylight!

Chameleon Lord Adonis and his East Devon counterparts

The Labour peer, appointed by the Conservative Party to lead a new infrastructure commission, will now sit as an Independent in the House of Lords after having been a Social Democrat councillor and Liberal Democrat election candidate before joining Labour.

Reminds me of one or two people in East Devon … REAL independents start that way and end that way and as a result are not trusted with majority party committee Chairmanships where a rogue vote could change policy nor are they admitted into their inner sanctums …

What mainstream media isn’t telling you about that DCC Cranbrook Report!

What the Express and Echo article on Cranbrook DIDN’T report:

Firstly, that along with Councillor Moulding, other EDDC (or former EDDC) councillors were part of the DCC task group which were closely involved with the development of Cranbrook: councillors Bowden and former EDDC Leader Sarah Randall-Johnson.

and bits of the report that didn’t make the mainstream media have been extracted here:

Developers are house builders, not town builders. The planning of e.g. the town centre and open spaces is the responsibility of the district council as the local planning authority whose responsibility it is to ensure that developing land commercially is coordinated with building a new community with social as well as physical facilities and infrastructure. It took five years to negotiate the original Section 106 Agreement.

Numerous concerns were shared with the task group in relation to the developers’ activities, among them a large number of incidents relating to the quality of the completed homes, including compliance with plans and residents struggling to encourage developers to address any shortcomings. Landscaping of community space has followed rather than preceded development and the management and maintenance of future community space and development land is lacking. The number of complaints regarding the quality of the built environment resulted in some community representatives being concerned about Cranbrook’s future reputation and the success of future phases.

Despite numerous invitations it was disappointing that none of the four house builders were available to comment on the concerns which participants shared with the task group.

Community Infrastructure

There is no standard model for planning community infrastructure and negotiating with developers, service commissioners and providers, but what is critical in creating a new town is upfront funding to support delivery the development of roads, community infrastructure and affordable housing from the public purse. Some of those facilities, e.g. the primary and secondary schools, Clyst Honiton bypass and Younghayes Community Centre, have been finalised ahead of schedule in Cranbrook. For others, notably the train station, there is a strong public perception that facilities are substantially behind schedule. Building and operating facilities without residents to use them is not viable but equally, residents expect facilities as soon as they move in. Participants repeatedly called for a multi-disciplinary team to plan and shape the future provision of services in Cranbrook.

In the absence of alternative public transport provision other than a limited but expanding bus service, car parking facilities were described as inadequate, including insufficient car parking allocation per bedroom, no visitors’ car parking, allocated parking bays being situated away from homes and garages being physically too small for cars to fit in them. Concern was expressed that habits formed in the early days would be hard to unlearn and that transport infrastructure should be delivered in line with residential development. Residents criticised “blue sky” bicycle thinking ignoring the reality that today’s Society had a two car per dwelling dependency which should be catered for in new development.

The roads in the town are not yet adopted, and as they are carrying significant volumes of construction traffic, the County Council does not currently have timescales for when responsibility will be transferred. The maintenance for the roads remains the responsibility of the developers, including gritting in the winter. The task group understands that the developers have an agreement with Devon County Council to finance gritting by the highway authority in severe weather. Several participants expressed concerns about dangerous car parking by residents and developers on pavements, corners and junctions but Devon County Council cannot extend its civil parking enforcement service until the roads are adopted.

Safe access routes to the Cranbrook Education Campus (primary and secondary schools) were due to be completed by the end of August 2015, including secure footpaths. An Infrastructure Site Manager employed by the Developer Consortium was overseeing their completion.

The task group remains concerned about the secondary school being located next to the railway line. Network Rail has committed to delivering awareness training for the children once per year in the school. The school was also planning to operate manned gates.

The main road through Cranbrook is not finished which might cause problems for parents whose children attend both the Cranbrook Education Campus. They would have to drop children off at both sites at similar times with no direct access route to both.

A pre-school facility would have assisted at an early stage.

When the first residents moved into Cranbrook in the summer of 2012, there was no social or community infrastructure or service provision beyond the completion of their homes. The task group repeatedly heard how this was a problem especially for the more vulnerable residents, including single parent families and residents without access to private transport. Social housing occupants were housed in Cranbrook and thereby removed from established communities, with shops, public transport and public services, and lived in Cranbrook in isolation. The complete lack of healthcare, social care or other professional support during the first 18-24 months meant that some residents were left to struggle on their own, exacerbating existing problems, including (post-natal/long-term) depression and drug/alcohol dependency.

Participants repeatedly expressed how there was provision for young children under the age of five in the form of open spaces and safe play areas, and some surrounded by unsafe fencing, but still no facilities exist for older children and teenagers. This resulted in problems, e.g. older children using the park and making it an unpleasant environment for younger children to play. Although funding had been available in the Section 106 Agreement from the beginning, the youth bus had only commenced at a later date. The task group understands that this provision was temporally withdrawn following an alleged antisocial behaviour incident at the end of July 2015. Participants commented that the provision should increase in order to combat antisocial behaviour issues, rather than be withdrawn.

The Cranbrook Medical Centre opened on 20 April 2015, nearly three years after the first residents moved in. An unsuccessful tender for new services and premises had been issued by the then Devon Primary Care NHS Trust in the past. The reorganisation of the NHS saw the responsibility for the commissioning of primary care services transfer to NHS England which awarded the contract to Devon Doctors. A funding challenge remains: Core services delivered in GP surgeries are funded per capita based on the number of formal registrations with a surgery. Although the current practice in Cranbrook has a capacity for approximately 3,500 patients, only 514 patients were formally registered at the end of July 2015. NHS England has provided some core minimum funding to the practice whilst the list size remains low and this will be paid until the registered population reaches a certain size, at which point capitation-based funding will be applied; another example of upfront funding required in the initial period. Two GPs, who are building their work load up to full time, and one nurse are currently practicing.

A backlog of patients who still need to be registered remains. When moving to Cranbrook, residents had to register with the Pinhoe & Broadclyst Medical Practice in cases where their old surgeries would not keep them registered. The Pinhoe & Broadclyst Medical Practice was difficult to access with public transport from Cranbrook which had proved a challenge for the more vulnerable members of the community.

Cranbrook is forecast to have approximately 20,000 residents by 2031 and the GP surgery will have to slowly evolve in order to grow in conjunction with the growth in residents and their future healthcare needs. The surgery will need a new building in the future with sufficient capacity to expand in a modular way to grow with the population. It would therefore be important for the NHS to be able to access Section 106 funding as appropriate to enable such premises to be facilitated, although there are concerns around State Aid which will need to be addresses as GP practices are effectively private businesses. NHS England is currently working with other health partners to develop a joint response to planning applications being received.

Pharmacy

The independent pharmacy is being accommodated in temporary premises at present and the task group heard from participants how its provision might have been better coordinated and co-located with the GP surgery with improved forward planning.

One of the objectives in the development of Cranbrook is to develop the employment infrastructure, i.e. create one job per residential dwelling. Employment opportunities exist in nearby Exeter, the SkyPark and the Science Park and eventually in the town itself, with the intention that Cranbrook develops as a small enterprise town. The development of small-scale employment spaces is currently being pursued with the conversion of two residential dwellings into offices. Commercial properties in the town centre have not yet sold. The task group questioned where spaces are in the town for small- and medium-sized enterprises to establish their businesses. An Economic Development Strategy has been developed for Cranbrook.