“Chief exec suspended over election failures leaves council by mutual consent”

Amongst other things, our CEO “misplaced” 6,000 voters by using inadequate means of registering them and had to explain himself (not terribly well in Owl’s opinion) to a Parliamentary committee:

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2014/10/14/official-transcript-of-eddc-ceo-evidence-to-parliamentary-committee-on-voter-engagement/

“A chief executive who was suspended over failures in the running of the 2017 general election process has left by mutual consent.

John Sellgren was suspended from his post at Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council in November 2017 after a review by Andrew Scallon, of the Association of Electoral Administrators, which found that more than 500 postal voters were disenfranchised, and close to 1,000 potential electors not included on the register.

A statement from the council on Sellgren’s departure said: “We would like to place on record our thanks for John’s efforts during his seven years with us. The council recently had its first all-out elections and the new administration has an ambitious manifesto and many significant projects to deliver in the years ahead.

“With this in mind the authority will now consider what management leadership arrangements to put in place to support this programme.”

Sellgren said: “I have enjoyed my time at Newcastle and send my best wishes to the dedicated team of staff and partners with whom it has been a pleasure to have worked.”

The council said it wanted to point out that there had been no additional payments made to Mr Sellgren.

Labour’s Paul Farrelly held the Newcastle-under-Lyme seat by 30 votes with 21,124 to his Conservative rival’s 21,094.

The Scallon report was commissioned shortly after the election when claims were made that some students at Keele University and postal voters were unable to vote despite following the correct procedures.
Some said they were turned away from polling stations despite having polling cards with them, and others who said they had registered to vote by the deadline were turned away for not having provided extra information required.

Scallon’s report said: “Human error and judgement and a lack of knowledge were responsible for the things that went wrong and led to the disenfranchisement of a significant number of people, raising questions about the mandate of the candidate declared elected as Newcastle-under-Lyme’s member of Parliament.”

He noted inadequate performance by Mr Sellgren (as acting returning officer/electoral registration officer) and consultants, worsened by a lack of experience among elections office staff and over-reliance on a software system, which was not properly managed.”

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=36393%3Achief-exec-suspended-over-election-failures-leaves-council-by-mutual-consent&catid=59&Itemid=27

“New Zealand bans sales of homes to [many] foreigners”

It can be done.

“New Zealand’s parliament has banned many foreigners from buying existing homes in the country – a move aimed at making properties more affordable.

The ban only applies to non-residents. Australians and Singaporeans are exempt because of free-trade deals.

New Zealand is facing a housing affordability crisis which has left home ownership out of reach for many.

Low interest rates, limited housing stock and immigration have driven up prices in recent years.

Is it a total ban?

No, only non-residents are affected by the Overseas Investment Amendment Bill, which was passed in a 63-57 vote on Wednesday.

They are now banned from purchasing most types of homes – but they will be able to make limited investments in new apartments in large developments.
Foreigners with residency status in New Zealand – as well as non-resident Australian and Singaporean nationals – are not affected by the ban….”

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-45199034

Social housing: sticking plaster on a haemorrhage

“The Government’s long awaited social housing green paper has concentrated on improving relations between residents’ and landlords but has disappointed councils by offering no new powers to support house building.

Among the main proposals in A new deal for social housing are publication of key performance indicators to allow residents to compare landlords, a revived stock transfer programme, a right-to-buy exercisable in stages and more effective resolution of complaints.

Judith Blake, the Local Government Association’s housing spokesperson, said: “This green paper is a step towards delivering more social homes but it is only a small step, compared with the huge and immediate need for more genuinely affordable homes.

“The Government must go beyond the limited measures announced so far, scrap the housing borrowing cap, and enable all councils, across the country, to borrow to build once more.”

National Housing Federation chief executive David Orr – who represents housing associations – said: “Our members fully share the Government’s commitment to ensuring tenants get the quality services they need – and that they can hold their landlords to account if they don’t.”

He added: “Without significant new investment in the building of more social housing, it is very hard to see how it can be a safety net and springboard for all the people who desperately need it.” …”

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=36407%3Acouncil-concern-at-lack-of-new-powers-in-green-paper-to-support-housebuilding&catid=60&Itemid=28

“CEO pay soars as working wages flatline”

“Pay for chief executives at Britain’s largest listed companies rose more than six times faster than wages in the wider workforce last year. The average boss’s pay packet hit £3.9m. A worker on a median salary of £23,474 would have to work 167 years to earn that.

Chief executive pay at FTSE 100 businesses surged 11% while average worker earnings failed to keep pace with inflation, rising just 1.7%, according to the High Pay Centre’s annual review. The report comes after years of workers’ pay being squeezed by weak pay growth and rising prices. The mean figure for female bosses was £2.8m – less than half the £5.9m average for men – and men got more than women in eight out of 10 companies and organisations that reported figures under government rules

Frances O’Grady, the general secretary of the Trades Union Congress, said: “Workers should get seats on boardroom pay committees to bring a bit of common sense to pay decisions. And the government should put the minimum wage up to £10 an hour to give more workers a fairer share of the wealth they create.” Meanwhile, unions have rebuffed a call from the transport secretary to cap train fare rises if rail workers agree to cap their pay claims accordingly. “As you will be aware, one of the industry’s largest costs is pay,” Chris Grayling wrote to rail unions. The RMT said rail staff would not pay for “the greed of the private train operating companies”.”

Source: Guardian e-briefing

Fiddling while social housing burns

“When she first came to power Theresa May promised to address Britain’s “burning injustices”. A few weeks ago, MPs were asked to quietly drop the phrase. Tied up in the complications of Brexit, the government has done very little to help the poor and disadvantaged – those who voted in protest against their own circumstances in the referendum. Neglecting this group has not helped past governments, and this one seems to be making the same mistake.

A new green paper on social housing seems unlikely to buck the trend. It recognises that there is a problem with social housing, but fails to recognise the nature of that problem: that there simply needs to be more of it. Instead, it talks about making social housing “fairer”, and “better quality”, and “challenging the stereotypes that exist about residents and their communities”. It says, rather patronisingly, that no social housing tenant should feel a “stigma” about their situation. That is not the pressing issue.

There are almost 1.2 million people on the waiting list for social housing. As they wait, people are forced to pay rent they cannot afford, and as a consequence they cannot afford to buy food. It is no coincidence that the use of food banks in Britain is soaring. But the government is doing little to help. Experts say we need between 70,000 and 90,000 new homes for social housing a year to meet the need in England. Last year fewer than 6,000 were built – a record low. And there are no new funds in the offing to increase supply.

Instead, the green paper concentrates on initiatives such as league tables for social landlords, which it says will “rebalance the landlord/tenant relationship”. But even this is unlikely to work. With such a short supply of social housing, landlords at the bottom of the league aren’t going to suffer from a lack of interest. Neither is it going to be easy for social tenants to flit between houses, depending on their ratings. And social landlords aren’t really a problem either, as these tend to be housing associations or local councils, and bound by professional codes and regulations. Much more dubious are the amateur landlords in the private sector – able to chuck tenants out on a whim – which is where people end up when they cannot get social housing.

This is not the first time the government has tried to distract from a funding crisis by introducing new league tables: it has done this with universities, and rail operators, and lately with nursing and midwifery. It’s an underhand technique – an attempt to shift attention off the government and on to the competition, and to show that the system is at least working for some. But it’s time it started to address the real problems – and for houses that means more building.”

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/aug/14/tories-houses-build-landlord-crisis-league-tables

“Elderly should be housed in luxury developments with spas to keep them out of care home”

Owl says: Just one problem – in the whole glowing article the cost of these homes is never mentioned! You can be quite sure these homes will be out of reach for “ordinary” (ie not rich) people – rather like all other new housing.

“Traditional care homes will be increasingly replaced by luxury developments with spas, hairdressers and beauty salons in a bid to keep pensioners independent for longer, ministers say today.

The Government plans will see £76 million invested annually for the next three years in new homes specially designed for those who are frail, elderly or suffering from disabilities.

Health officials said the plans aim to keep people independent for longer – with their own front door, but more support on hand, with use of sensors and video monitoring to track the most vulnerable.

Housing developers will be able to bid for funds, from the programme which has already seen £315 million allocated to projects which design such homes. …”

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2018/08/13/elderly-should-housed-luxury-developments-spas-keep-care-homes/

A useful critique on new planning regulations (local councils stay silent on their views)

Why CPRE thinks it is a developers’ charter (again):

https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/new-planning-policy-framework-slammed-1892197

“Government to trial citizens juries and mass online polls in local decision-making”

Owl says: as with all these ideas, proof of the pudding is in the eating.

Remember, we are less than a year away from local elections and promises will be poured out until they are over!

And, maybe, it’s just a way of forcing us to make rationing decisions and deflecting responsibility from government policies leading to rationing in the first place

“The government is to trial ways for people to take a more direct role in decisions that affect their local area, with proposals for “Citizens’ Juries” or mass participation in decision-making on community issues via an online poll or app.

The proposal is part of the first Civil Society Strategy in 15 years, which was unveiled today by Tracey Crouch, Minister for Sport and Civil Society.
“Many people feel disenfranchised and disempowered, and the government is keen to find new ways to give people back a sense of control over their communities’ future,” the document says.

“Participatory democracy methods, such as Citizens’ Juries, can make a profound difference to people’s lives: evidence shows that enabling people to participate in the decisions that affect them improves people’s confidence in dealing with local issues, builds bridges between citizens and the government, fosters more engagement, and increases social capital. It also increases people’s understanding of how decisions are taken, and leads to authorities making better decisions and developing more effective solutions to issues as a broader range of expertise can be tapped into to solve public issues.”

The ‘Innovation in Democracy’ pilot scheme will take place in six regions across the country “to trial face-to-face deliberation (such as Citizens’ Juries) complemented by online civic tech tools to increase broad engagement and transparency”.

The publication also says the government wishes to go devolve more power to community groups and parishes. It will explore with the National Association of Local Councils and others the option for local ‘charters’ between a principal council, local councils, and community groups setting out respective responsibilities.

“This could include joint service delivery or the transfer of service delivery responsibilities to local councils, parishes or community groups, the transfer of borough council assets to local councils, or from councils to parishes, and the opportunity for councils or parishes to ‘cluster’, that is to form a consortium with sufficient scale to commission or deliver larger service functions,” it adds.

Other initiatives set out in the Civil Society Strategy include:

Revising the guidance that helps communities take ownership of local assets.

Exploring means of ensuring community-led enterprises which take over public assets or services are able to secure the funding they need.

Improving the use of the Public Services (Social Value) Act 2012 “to ensure that organisations can generate more social value for communities when spending public money on government contracts”. The government will explore the potential for the use of social value in grants as well as contracts, and the suggestion that the Act should be applied to other areas of public decision-making such as planning and community asset transfer. Also, “as announced on 25 June 2018, central government departments will be expected to apply the terms of the Act to goods and works and to ‘account for’ the social value of new procurements, rather than just ‘consider’ it as currently. The Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport will lead the way by applying this wider remit to major projects, to be followed by other departments in due course.

Exploring (through the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government) the potential of transfers of public land to community-led housing initiatives, such as Community Land Trusts, by which residents become members of a trust which holds land and housing on behalf of the community.

Unlocking £20m from inactive charitable trusts (those which spend less than 30% of their annual income) to support community organisations over the next two years.

Supporting charities “to make their voices heard on issues that matter to them and ensuring that charitable trustees reflect the diversity of the society they serve”.

Distributing money from dormant bank accounts to independent organisations that will (a) get disadvantaged young people into employment (£90m) and (b) tackle financial exclusion and the problem of access to affordable credit (£55m).

Jeremy Wright, Secretary of State for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, said: “Our plans stand side-by-side with the Industrial Strategy, supporting its drive to grow the economy, while creating an environment where people and communities are at the heart of decision-making.

“These ambitious plans will harness the expertise of volunteers, charities and business to help people take a more active part in their local areas.”
Tracey Crouch said: “Civil society is the bedrock of our communities. It is made up of the volunteers, youth workers, charities and innovative businesses that work to improve lives and make areas better for all.
“Our strategy builds on this spirit of common good to help create a country that works for everyone. I want people, organisations and businesses to feel inspired to get involved and make a difference.

“Through collaboration, we will unlock the huge potential of this incredible sector, help it grow, support the next generation and create a fairer society.”

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=36313%3Agovernment-to-trial-citizens-juries-and-mass-online-polls-in-local-decision-making&catid=59&Itemid=27

“Austerity kills: this week’s figures show its devastating toll”

” … According to a bombshell report in the British Medical Journal last year, austerity has been linked to 120,000 extra deaths since 2010. In practice, it suggested, that could lead to 100 early deaths every single day in the coming years. The impact is, predictably enough, felt by the poorest.

Remember when Theresa May stood on the steps of Downing Street in July 2016 and delivered her first speech as prime minister, promising to correct Britain’s “burning injustices”? One of these injustices was that those born poor die nine years earlier. And yet according to David Buck – an expert in health inequalities at the King’s Fund – the gap in health outcomes and life expectancy between the most affluent and the least well-off is only widening under her abysmal premiership.

What could possibly be causing this national disaster? Rule out alcohol use: it has been steadily falling, with the ONS finding in 2016 that alcohol consumption had fallen to its lowest rate since the survey began in 2005. There are fewer smokers in England than ever. As Dorling notes, there has not been a major influenza outbreak since the increase in life expectancy ground to a halt. Neither is it credible to suggest Britain has simply reached a plateau – that life expectancy cannot keep increasing for ever. “We are a long way off that,” as Professor Martin McKee has put it, observing that life expectancy in Japan and Scandinavian nations is higher.

Given the government is refusing a national inquiry into the great standstill in life expectancy, experts are left without a credible explanation other than austerity.

Consider specific policies. The NHS has suffered the longest squeeze in its funding as a share of the economy since it was founded after the war. Its annual increase in funding in the first four years of Tory-led rule was 1.3%, despite growing patient demand and increasing healthcare costs. Then there’s social care for the elderly: a devastating £6bn less spent since David Cameron entered Downing Street. As Dorling and Basten note, since 2010, many care homes – all too often a privately run racket – have closed; and cuts to social security, not least disability benefits, have undoubtedly played a role. There are other chilling factors at play, too. Until the financial crash, Britain’s suicide rate had been falling. Since then, experts believe there could have been an extra 1,000 deaths from suicide and an additional 30 to 40,000 attempts, with austerity playing a role.

This country and its people will be paying for the Tories’ ideologically driven disaster for years to come. Those children driven into poverty will have worse health and lowered educational opportunities as a consequence, undermining their potential, and with it the potential of the whole country. As living standards stagnate, a consumer debt bubble beckons, with potentially disastrous economic consequences. Public services and infrastructure will creak. But there is far more at stake.

Austerity is literally a matter of life and death. Unless it is stopped, lives will continue to be unnecessarily shortened. That Cameron and Osborne crow over a project that has caused so much misery is grotesque. Among the many injustices they have perpetrated, history must surely record the robbing of human life for ideological means.”

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/aug/08/austerity-kills-life-expectancy-standstill-britain

“Jobcentre Staff Told By DWP Not To Record Number Of People They Send To Foodbanks”

“Jobcentre staff are told not to keep a record of the number of people they direct to foodbanks, despite appearing to send thousands of people to charities providing food parcels to hard-pressed families.

A directive, issued by the Department of Work and Pensions (DWP), tells staff they must not use the term “referral” or “voucher”, and should not keep any record of the number of people they “signpost” to foodbanks.

Critics have urged the Government to halt the practice as ministers have used the lack of records to dodge questions about the impact of welfare reforms.

The revelation also indicates how charities are being relied upon to support the benefits system, but not to what extent. One major food bank charity says it hands out nearly 60,000 food parcels every year as a result of “signposting”.

The Whitehall department’s so-called ‘Operational Instructions’ were obtained following a Freedom of Information request in February which asked for details on what staff are told to do if people ask for food aid.

The instructions state that instead of offering referrals or vouchers to claimants, Jobcentre staff must only offer “signposting slips”.”

In bold letters, the instructions say: “The signposting slip must not be referred to as a Foodbank Voucher.”

The only time Jobcentre staff are allowed to keep track is if the foodbank makes a request, the instructions reveal. …”

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/foodbanks-records-jobcentre-dwp_uk_5b61c1bde4b0b15aba9ebcc9

“High Court dismisses legal challenge to local government reorganisation in Dorset”

Owl says: Christchurch – wealthy, elderly Tories with high-value properties and the notorious ultra-right wing MP “Sir” (earned for nothing) Christopher Chope – the guy who killed the upskirting bill, killed the bill to protect police dogs, tried to stop the minimum wage, stopped a bill to give carers free parking at hospitals, etc. etc. Presumably, they didn’t want to subsidise the “oiks” in neighbouring Bournemouth and Poole!!!

“Under the proposals, backed by former Communities Secretary Sajid Javid, Christchurch is due to become part of a new unitary through a merger with Bournemouth and Poole councils.

Another ‘rural’ unitary would be established from East Dorset, North Dorset, Purbeck, West Dorset and Weymouth & Portland. The county council would cease to exist.

Christchurch had argued that the Secretary of State acted beyond his powers in passing the legislation to allow the reorganisation to go ahead.
The judicial review challenge was heard in the High Court on 30 July.
Cllr David Flagg, Leader of the Council, Christchurch Borough Council, said: “We are disappointed by today’s judgement. We have been advised that a number of points set out in the judgment are still arguable in law and therefore we will be responding to the judge on these. Depending on his response we will consider whether an appeal to the Court of Appeal would be appropriate or not.”

A statement issued on behalf of Bournemouth Borough Council, Dorset County Council, Borough of Poole, East Dorset District Council, North Dorset District Council, Purbeck District Council, West Dorset District Council and Weymouth & Portland Borough Council said they were “delighted but unsurprised” by the judgment.

It added: “A huge amount of work has already been undertaken, and we are making excellent progress towards creating the two new councils. Christchurch Borough councillors and their officers have always been welcome at the various meetings that have taken place, working to form the two new councils.

“We respect the choice of Christchurch Borough Council to challenge the Secretary of State’s decision, through a judicial review on a procedural point of law. In doing so, we note that the validity of the case for creating two new councils was not the basis for this judicial review challenge.

“Christchurch Borough Council has spent a very significant amount of council tax payers’ money in pursuing this legal action. The High Court has rejected that challenge and we hope that all Christchurch Borough Councillors will now accept that judgment, and fully take part in planning for and making decisions about the new council.”

The statement continued: “We are optimistic this matter is now behind us, and we can look forward to working together to create the best new local councils we can, to protect public services as much as possible, and to secure future growth and prosperity for our areas.”

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=36287%3Ahigh-court-dismisses-legal-challenge-to-local-government-reorganisation-in-dorset&catid=59&Itemid=27

Don’t look to eastern East Devon for jobs unless you have a car

Following on from the post on an increase in buses and frequencies on the western side of East Devon (which has effectively become a commuting suburb of Exeter:

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2018/08/06/western-east-devon-profits-from-extra-buses-eastern-east-devon-gets-nothing-time-to-join-west-dorset/

comes this information:

“Bad buses ruin work chances

Unreliable buses that are too expensive are causing low-income families to miss out on jobs, according to a study by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation.

Fewer services mean people are unable to travel long distances and guarantee punctuality, putting commuters at risk of losing their job. Since 2010 funding for buses has dropped £182 million, fares have risen 13 per cent above inflation and 3,347 routes have been cut.”

Source: Mirror page 25

“If we value rural Britain, we can’t build houses all over it”

“Government housing policy has lost all contact with planning Britain’s countryside. This week the Campaign for the Preservation of Rural England (CPRE) is up in arms over house-building in green belts, and over the lack of what it calls affordable housing. These are a distraction. It is planning as such that has collapsed.

The CPRE is concerned that 8,000 houses were built last year on green-belt land, or 24,000 over the past decade, and that hardly any were affordable. This has predictably raised a green light over all green belts, with developers rushing forward with applications for 460,000 new homes now in process. Already, unplanned and sprawling “toy-town” estates are spreading across the home counties, the Fens, the Somerset Levels and the Severn Valley. It has sucked development into the south-east of England, denuded town centres and put ever more pressure on transport corridors. It is the worst sort of “non-planning”.

New green belt housing applications push total to a record 460,000
The issue should not be green-belt building or affordability. All rural land is now in contention. As for affordability – usually 20% off market price – such a subsidy is always short-term, and should never be a loophole for allowing building where it would otherwise be stopped.

New houses in the countryside have intense local impact, yet they form a trivial element in the housing market, of which some 90% involves existing stock. Policy should be aimed at genuinely boosting supply. This means cutting Britain’s shocking underoccupation of existing buildings. It means help with downsizing and subletting. It means not taxing sales, as stamp duty does. It means densifying urban sites and being more flexible on building uses. Modern “green” development is in cities.

Local planning must be restored. The government claims the right to decide how many new people come to Britain. It should grant local people the same right, to control the pace and nature of settlement in their communities. New planning rules deny them that right. They dictate that, should local people fight imposed targets, they will lose any further say in the matter, allowing free rein to development. It is heads we win, tails you lose localism.

Britain’s reputation for town-and-country planning has all but evaporated over the past decade. Each change in planning rules, usually dictated by the building lobby, has drawn ever more of the countryside into speculative play. The solution does not lie in arguing over a few hundred green-belt acres and a few thousand subsidised houses. County land-use planning has to be restored. Landscape considered worthy of long-term preservation – and much of it is still outside national parks – should be “listed” for its scenic and environmental value, like conservation areas in towns. Other land could then be declared a potentially developable land bank.

Listing the landscape would replace the present fighting with proper planning. Everyone would know where they stood. Rural Britain would not, as now, be up for speculative land grab. The old mistakes would not be repeated.”

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/aug/06/planning-system-uk-landscapes-listing-rural-britain

“Social consciousness is rapidly disappearing”

“… In the heart of London’s theater district opposite the Savoy Hotel, with rooms for up to $800 a night, scores of people are lingering patiently on a balmy summer evening.

The snaking line near a branch of Coutts & Co., the bankers to the Queen, displays a portrait of contemporary London: men and women of all ages and ethnic backgrounds, some speaking English and some Polish amid a cacophony of other languages. Some are dressed smartly in shirts and trousers, others in jeans and baseball caps. One man is wearing a food delivery company uniform.

But they’re not there for a deal on tickets to a West End show or a table at Gordon Ramsay’s joint. They’re there for food handouts from a local charity. …

Public spending in Britain has fallen to about 38 percent of gross domestic product from 45 percent in 2010, according to figures from the Office for Budget Responsibility.

Research by charity Shelter found that 55 percent of homeless families in temporary accommodation are working. The 33,000 families represent an increase of 73 percent since 2013, according to the research based on freedom of information requests.

“Everybody’s fighting for themselves now,” Mohammed Nazir, the cabinet member for housing in Slough Borough Council on the fringes of London, said after a meeting in the U.K. Parliament about homelessness. “Social consciousness is rapidly disappearing.”

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-08-06/brexit-noise-drowns-out-london-s-cry-for-help?cmpid%3D=socialflow-facebook-brexit

US luxury property website: “Rental Values Sink in London, Rise in the South West of England”

“The capital might still hold its title as the most expensive rental region across England and Wales—prices average £1,271 (US$1,652) per month—but price growth went negative in the year to June, as values dipped 0.5%.

The South West of England was home to the fastest rising rents in the same time frame, the report said. Prices in this region—which includes rural areas of Cornwall and Devon, along with cities like Bristol, Plymouth and Exeter—rose by 3.4%, bringing the average rental price to £686 (US$891).

“Plymouth is a particular hotspot,” said Martyn Alderton, national lettings director at Your Move, in the report. “As well as stunning countryside and lower cost of living, current multi-million pound developments are creating employment opportunities. …”

https://www.mansionglobal.com/articles/rental-values-sink-in-london-rise-in-the-south-west-of-england-104900

“Soaring rents rose 60% faster than pay since 2011 – Shelter”

“Rents have risen 60% faster than wages across England since 2011, according to analysis from housing charity Shelter, which claims the crisis is spilling out of cities into “Middle England” towns such as Tunbridge Wells.

The figures show that private rents have risen by 16% since 2011, outpacing average wages which have only risen by 10% over that period. Shelter analysed official data from the Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings and the Index of Private Housing Rental Prices.

The charity said the rental crisis was spreading out from London to cities like Cambridge, Bristol and Birmingham, and to “middle England” towns such as Tunbridge Wells and Milton Keynes, where people are increasingly unable to afford soaring rents while their wages lag behind. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/aug/03/soaring-rents-rose-60-faster-than-pay-since-2011-shelter

“Northamptonshire’s financial woes are just the tip of the iceberg”

“… All councils in Britain are required to match annual day-to-day spending with income: unlike the Treasury, local authorities cannot fund current spending from borrowing. They can, of course, borrow to spend on capital items such as land and buildings. Northamptonshire’s difficulties derive largely from a failure by councillors to address the need to match spending to income. But the wider context of relentless reductions to council spending cannot be ignored.

The Treasury has been attempting to reduce the UK government’s deficit since the coalition took office in 2010. But populist pressure to protect state pensions and the NHS, along with decisions to increase international development spending, have meant that the burden of lowering the deficit has fallen on unloved sectors and services, notably provision within the oversight of the Home Office and the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government. Grants to councils in England fell by almost 50% between 2010-11 and 2017-18, and spending in real terms has tumbled by almost 30% on average.

Councils themselves, within falling budgets, have chosen to protect social care for children and adults. No chief executive or leader wants to face the dire consequences of even a single childcare failure, so money has (just about) continued to reach children’s social services. For older people’s care, the picture has been grim. Entitlements have been reduced and services cut back. Fast-rising numbers of over-75s mean that demand is growing while resources shrink.

Even the government came to realise that with rising demand and falling real resources, adult social care was unsustainable. It is a measure of overall government priorities that between 2010-11 and 2017-18 the amount spent on state pensions in the UK rose by £26bn, while spending on adult social care in England was virtually unchanged in cash terms. Only after it became clear that care homes were closing and that services were likely to fail did ministers allow councils to put up council tax and provide new grant funding via the Better Care Fund.

Other local services such as libraries, planning, highways, housing and waste management have been cut by far more than adult care. Almost by default, the way deficit reduction has been delivered has led to a retreat in the very public services that were the origins of the modern developed British state. While Victorians saw the need for clean streets, lighting, police, parks, libraries, rubbish collection and transport, the impact of post-2010 deficit reduction has been to cut such services hardest.

The abolition of the audit commission has ensured that there has been no official agency to publish embarrassing reports about the impact of cuts on councils’ financial health or, even more awkwardly for Whitehall, on the asymmetric nature of the government’s approach to achieving a zero deficit. The National Audit Office, which, crucially, reports to parliament, has undertaken noble work on the broader systemic challenge to local authorities’ financial sustainability. In a report published in March, the NAO noted that “10.6% of single-tier and county authorities would have the equivalent of less than three years’ reserves … left if they continued to use their reserves at the rate they did in 2016-17”.

In short, many of the larger councils that deliver social care are running short of resources. There have been recent press reports that in the coming spending review, covering the period 2020-21 to 2023-24, local government will again be expected to bear the brunt of deficit reduction. It is worth remembering that a zero deficit was originally planned to be achieved by 2015-16. Northamptonshire may have reached the precipice first, but if reductions in local authority budgets continue, they are unlikely to be the last. The county’s plight is evidence of a wider challenge facing the country: are we willing to put up taxes to protect provision or do we want the state to stop delivering services? A crunch point is approaching.”

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/aug/02/northamptonshire-finances-services-tax-rises

Top lawyers argue tax avoidance laws cause privacy problem for their rich client!

“The law firm Mishcon de Reya has filed a legal complaint against new anti-tax evasion measures, arguing that they infringe privacy and data protection rights.

The Information Commissioner’s Office confirmed it had received a complaint against HMRC and the Common Reporting Standard, a system whereby different countries’ tax authorities automatically exchange information.

The complaint was filed on behalf of an unnamed EU citizen who did not wish to be identified, according to the Financial Times. The woman is domiciled in Italy, meaning she argues it is her home for tax purposes.

It is not known where she is currently resident, though she was reported to have been previously resident in the UK and to have had a UK bank account containing £4,000.

The complaint claims that sharing her information with overseas tax authorities would subject her to a risk of her data being hacked, and would infringe European data protection and human rights laws. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2018/aug/02/mishcon-de-reya-complains-about-anti-tax-evasion-measures

“Taxpayer foots £2.7million bill to subsidise MPs’ bars and restaurants after costs rise by £200,000”

The headline says it all.

“… One of the most controversial elements of the catering at the House is that alcohol prices are kept artificially low.

In April this year the cost of a pint of beer at the Commons bars was nudged up by just 1.5 per cent to £3.35 – well below the 2.7 per cent CPI inflation rate at the time.

… Dishes on offer in the Members’ Dining Room include ‘pan fried salmon with buttered samphire, macerated fennel, radish and rösti potato’ – which will set you back £6.90.

One of the starters recently was ‘smoked halibut with watercress, horseradish crème fraiche, pink grapefruit and dehydrated pickled shallots’, on offer for £4.25.

… A dessert of ‘poached pear with Baileys ice cream and hazelnut’ is £2.55.

MPs can get a three course lunch for just £10.30, or a three course dinner for £15.30.

A bottle of champagne costs £35, and Prosecco £21.

A 187ml bottle of Cabernet Sauvignon Merlot is just £2.25, and a cappuccino 80p.

… Dr Sarah Wollaston, Totnes MP and now health select committee chair, warned in 2011 that some of her colleagues were drinking ‘really quite heavily’.

‘Who would go to see a surgeon who had just drunk a bottle of wine at lunchtime? But we fully accept that MPs are perfectly capable of performing as MPs despite some of them drinking really quite heavily,’ she said. …”

zhttp://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4713580/Subsidy-MPs-bars-restaurants-rises-2-7m.html

US donors courted by Tory ultra-right wing think-tank

“A rightwing thinktank has been offering potential US donors access to government ministers and civil servants as it raises cash for research to support the free-trade deals demanded by hardline Brexiters, according to an investigation.

The director of the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) was secretly recorded telling an undercover reporter that funders could get to know ministers on first-name terms and that his organisation was in “the Brexit influencing game”.

Mark Littlewood claimed the IEA could make introductions to ministers and said the thinktank’s trade expert knew Boris Johnson, Michael Gove, David Davis and Liam Fox well.

The IEA chief was also recorded suggesting potential US donors could fund and shape “substantial content” of research commissioned by the thinktank.

This could hugely benefit US farmers by lifting the ban on the sale in the UK of beef from cattle treated with growth hormones and chlorine-washed chicken.

Speaking about what kind of Westminster access the IEA could provide donors with, Littlewood told the investigator: “I have absolutely no problem with people who have business interests, us facilitating those.”

The investigation, undertaken in May and June, also revealed the thinktank had already provided access to a minister for a US organisation.

The disclosures are likely to raise fresh questions about the independence and status of the IEA, which is established as an educational charity. Charity Commission rules state that “an organisation will not be charitable if its purposes are political”. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2018/jul/29/rightwing-thinktank-ministerial-access-potential-us-donors-insitute-of-economic-affairs-brexit