Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Affordable and Social Housing, Developers/ Development, Devolution, East Devon Growth Point, Greater Exeter, Housing (local), Infrastructure, Land Supply, Local Enterprise Partnership, Local Plan, Transparency

“Greater Exeter” and its impact on housing and infrastructure in East Devon

We learned recently that the current Stagecoach depot opposite the bus station in Exeter is going to be turned into a massive block of student housing – 557 units.

Now we hear that there are plans for the site of the Honiton Inn, on the roundabout opposite the bus station to be another student block of 101 flats with their own private gym and cinema – opposite a public gym and cinema!

http://m.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/plans-in-for-huge-exeter-city-centre-student-block-on-honiton-inn-site/story-29794670-detail/story.html

What effect will this have on East Devon?

Well, “Greater Exeter” – whose “Visioning Board” like all such development and regeneration boards in “Greater Exeter” meets in secret – is making arrangements to do the next revision to its 3 Local Plans (Exeter, East Devon and Teignbridge) together.

It will be totally evident (in fact it is already) that Exeter’s main growth in housing will remain student housing. So, where will housing for other people go? Obviously East Devon and Teignbridge.

Cranbrook has natural boundaries beyond which it will soon make its further expansion much more difficult than heretofore. Therefore, it will be towns such as Exmouth, Honiton and Sidmouth – and the green fields in-between – that must be expanded to take in the commuters into Exeter, with a possible massive impact.

None of this is being put before the general public in any of the three areas nor is adequate infrastructure being planned for this big change (or at least we cannot be allowed know of any). And, of course, our Local Enterprise Partnership will “own” the business rates of the Exeter “Growth Area” and will have its fingers in the many development pies.

Time to start talking about the NEXT revision of the Local Plan which may well see even more massive development in East Devon on a much bigger scale than we could ever have imagined and could dwarf the extra numbers already agreed..

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Accountability, Democracy, Devolution, EDDC, Local Enterprise Partnership, Transparency

Councillors to be told about devolution ” myths” – though some of them seem to be reality!

According to this week’s EDDC Knowledge newsletter, all councillors have been invited to a meeting on Thursday 20 October at 5 pm to hear a presentation on a “Devolution – ‘myth busting’ briefing”.

This presentation has already been given to DCC councillors and here is one Councillor’s report (Robert Vint):

“On Monday Devon County Councillors were presented with a “Myth Busting” training session on Devolution. On Thursday there was a repeat session for South Hams District Councillors.

The “Myths” they were attempting to “bust” were that the Devolution process was led by the LEP, was undemocratic, would result in local government reorganisation / centralisation etc.

The explanations – or non-explanations – only strengthened my concerns. It was confirmed that there would be no public consultation on the economic development plan but only on the Combined Authority proposal and that the LEP had played a central role.

I asked why the plan did not start by identifying local needs such as rural unemployment and affordable housing then consult communities and small businesses on how to tackle these problems. They said not to worry as this was an outline economic plan – but later they confirmed that there would be no consultation on the economic plan or any opportunity to change it.

We have a Devolution Prospectus written by the few big businesses in the LEP to serve their own needs rather than those of the wider community of Devon and Somerset. This has then been rubberstamped by local authorities who did not have the staff, time or vision to rewrite it to meet our real needs and who failed to consult residents and small and family businesses. As a result we will be subjected, without any opportunity to comment, to a local economic development strategy that will serve the wealthy rather than the majority and that will fail to provide jobs where they’re needed or houses to the people who need them most.

In contrast the RSA – Royal Society of Arts – outlines how we should be delivering genuine, fair and inclusive devolution.

The UK’s economic status-quo has resulted in huge sections of our population being ‘left behind’. So the RSA are proposing a radical programme of devolution, inclusive industrial strategies and investment in human capital to create a more inclusive, equal society.”

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Developers/ Development, Hinkley C, Infrastructure, Local Enterprise Partnership, Post-Brexit Adjustments, Transparency

Devon and Somerset devolution on governments “back burner”

Owl has two questions:

if it IS on the back burner, should we be hanging on Somerset’s coat tails, hoping for Hinkley C breadcrumbs and an elected Mayor who will be Hinkley-centric?

and

should we be employing LEP staff and shovelling out expenses to our LEP while things are re-evaluated – or should we cut our losses, scrap it and look to sustaining our own Devon economy in what will possibly be rocky post- Brexit times?

The region’s devolution bid appears to have been shoved onto the back burner this week, following a Government U-turn on the need for elected mayors.

Earlier this year council leaders were optimistic of securing a deal by the autumn, after agreeing on proposals to establish a combined-authority.

But the Treasury now looks to have ruled this possibility out, after revealing its “priority” will be areas with directly elected mayors.

Speaking to the Herald, Treasury minister David Gauke claimed this model provides local authorities with “maximal” opportunities for devolved powers.

“To get the most powers you need the best accountability and that’s delivered by directly-elected mayors,” he said.

“We think [it’s] the best model… so we continue to encourage local authorities to go down that route.

“Those areas that don’t want to go down that route, we will of course still look at the devolution options there.

“I think the priority is delivering the directly elected mayor model.”

This renewed focus on mayors appears to contradict messages from the Department for Communities and Local Government, which has previously indicated support for a combined authority model.

Earlier this year, councils in Devon and Somerset voted in favour of creating a combined authority for the region, on the understanding this would improve the area’s chances of a devolution deal.

Critics of the mayoral model express concern about the ability of a single leader to effectively represent areas as economically and geographically diverse as Plymouth and the Mendips.

Responding to Mr Gauke’s comments, leader of Somerset County Council, John Osman, said his understanding “is that the Prime Minister does not think a mayor is essential for devolution”.

“Some initial public engagement this summer suggests that is a view shared by Somerset residents,” he added.

“We have a compelling case for devolved powers and budgets which has the potential to drive productivity, address challenges and capitalise on our many opportunities.

“We aim to continue these with the new relevant minister, Sajid Javid, in the near future to maintain the momentum and take our plans forward.”

Conservative MP for Wells, James Heappey, acknowledged that the recent change in Government leadership has resulted in changes to devolution policy.

He suggested this could provide the region with an opportunity to “take [its] foot off the accelerator” and review its proposals.

“If there is value in doing it, if it’s going to allow public services to be more efficient…. Then clearly we should go ahead [with a combined authority bid],” he said.

“[But] it makes no sense to change things just for the sake of changing things.”

Kevin Foster, the MP for Torbay – which recently voted to scrap its mayoral system – said many residents “won’t be itching” to have another elected mayor.

But he suggested the option is worth considering if it means “getting transport powers and an ability to deliver for local people”.

Mr Gauke did stress that the Government is still keen to extend devolution beyond the high profile city regions.

He said “a lot of focus has been on cities” but it would be good to “show how devolution can work in all parts of the country”.

Read more at http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/ministers-send-devon-devolution-deal-to-the-back-of-the-queue/story-29780812-detail/story.html

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Accountability, Democracy, Devolution, Economy, Lobbying, Local Enterprise Partnership, Spin, Tim Jones, Transparency

LEP creates its own “Business Forum” – but it’s independent, honest guv!

Owl’s view: Unfortunately, it still walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and is still one hundred percent an LEP duck! Oh, and who is on it’s board – LEP Board member Tim Jones – quack, quack!

“A new business group has been formed to advise Government decision makers – but stressed it is not in competition with other South West business organisations.

B4SW will provide information and reports to the South West Local Enterprise Partnership (HotSW LEP) and ensure businesses across the region have a strong voice in discussions over Government investment.

“We have no intention of competing with other business groups,” Mr Marrow said. “They are doing good stuff.”

He explained that B4SW may be new, but is actually a “restructuring” of the Heart of the South West Local Enterprise Partnership’s (HotSW LEP) business forum.

That body was set up by the LEP, but was nevertheless independent of it, in order to provide business engagement.

But the forum was often mistaken as being part of the LEP, Chris Marrow, B4SW chairman, explained.

So, he said, B4SW has been formed as a community interest company (CIC), a type of social enterprise, to provide “a better structure to that of the forum, which had been “an informal group”.

Mr Marrow said the new organisation would report to the LEP, the organisation created by the coalition Government in 2011 to determine investment priorities, but is not constrained by the HotSW area of Devon and parts of Somerset.

“We meet around the region and will cover Cornwall,” Mr Marrow said, at an early meeting held in Plymouth.

“It’s a forum in which business people can come together and explore ideas and put their expertise back into the community for the advantage of the region.”

Mr Marrow said B4SW is composed of business people with vast experience in sectors such as maritime, supply chain, education, rural development and overseas trade.

“We have business people with particular expertise, a lot of experience in international affairs, with overseas contacts, and work with people in Africa and China,” he said.

He said the executive board has links to various other organisations such as universities and colleges, Chambers of Commerce, and the Federation of Small Businesses.

“The objective is to help businesses develop in the South West,” he said. “That includes improving exports, productivity, and job creation.”

He said B4SW would provide “blue sky thinking” and supply reports to the LEP.

He gave examples of studies into biofuels, ballast water management and kelp (seaweed) farming.

B4SW has also arranged a visit from transport training experts in South Africa and had discussions with Plymouth University and Flybe about maritime and aviation training.

Tim Jones, a B4SW board member, said the aim is also to bring together all business organisations across the HotSW and Cornwall and Isles of Scilly LEPs.

He said it was vital businesses shared a unified voice in order to push for Government investment, especially as political devolution is on the agenda.

“A combined business voice is essential, and becoming more so as we move down the devolution agenda and anther round of Government austerity,” he said. “So the cooperation of the business community is crucial.

“With devolution, although there is talk about business engagement, there’s a fear the voice of business will diminish.

“Combine that with the problems Whitehall has about infrastructure investment in the South West, it’s vital we have a single voice coming from the business community.”

http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/new-business-group-set-up-to-push-for-government-investment-in-south-west/story-29775868-detail/story.html

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Accountability, Consultation, Democracy, Devolution, Local Enterprise Partnership, Transparency

If devolution is the answer – what was the question?

Devolution doesn’t always mean taking back control

Since Tony Blair became prime minister in 1997, successive UK governments have fiddled around with ways of devolving power from Westminster and Whitehall. The most radical has been Scottish devolution, which continues to evolve. The least coherent has been the patchwork of schemes developed across England, ranging from a well-thought out arrangement for London, with a directly elected mayor and assembly, to the make-it-up-as-you-go-along “devolution deals” for the rest.

The coalition government of 2010-15 abolished – wisely – the regional governance bureaucracies. The first big replacement idea was Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs), intended as “business-led” mechanisms for spending public money. The areas covered by LEPs were in some cases obvious, based for example on established city regions or former metropolitan counties. In others the rationale was less clear, perhaps nowhere more so than the Heart of the South West (HotSW) LEP, covering a massive area from Plymouth to the south of Bristol [1]. It’s tempting to think that after Cornwall decided to go their own way and Bristol wasn’t having any truck with its Somerset neighbours, that HotSW was the “bit left over”.

The performance of these fundamentally secretive and undemocratic bodies is not the focus of this post [2]. They are relevant because the LEP areas have in some cases – including HotSW – formed the basis of the subsequent devolution proposals in England.

The government has been inviting groups of local authorities to submit proposals for devolving decision-making in certain functions, particularly infrastructure and economic development, but not limited to these.

The rationale behind this approach is that increasing productivity, a key goal of government policy, is best achieved by local targeting of support measures through local authorities and business interests working together.

The government has made it clear that access to some central funding is dependent on devolution deals being agreed. Invariably, local authorities across the area commit to setting up a “combined authority” to take the decisions. Unlike London, this would not be directly elected but would be made up of the leaders of the constituent councils plus non-elected representatives of the NHS and the LEP. Initially, agreement to having a directly-elected mayor was a condition of a devolution deal but the government now seems to be less rigid on this.

One of the problems with this approach is that it was designed for large urban areas. Greater Manchester, for example, has operated as a partnership of councils across a coherent area since the 1960s when Passenger Transport Authorities were set up. Manchester is the trail-blazer in the current devolution game, and it clearly works for them.

What is less clear is that the combined authority structure will work well in those areas of England that aren’t part of a conurbation. A pretentious-sounding body called The Independent Commission on Economic Growth and the Future of Public Services in Non-Metropolitan England produced a report last year arguing for devolution deals for the rest of England [3].

It does make the useful point that LEP areas do not in most cases coincide with functional economic areas (a conclusion which should be enough to discredit the whole idea of LEPs), but is otherwise a typical product of this debate in that it focusses on structures and “partnerships” from which communities are largely excluded.

The councils within the HotSW area have submitted a devolution bid to the government [4]. The bid identifies 6 challenges for the area (low productivity growth, limited labour market, patchy performance in innovation and enterprise, an ageing population, health and care integration, infrastructure and connectivity) and 6 “Golden Opportunities” for improving growth and productivity (marine, nuclear, aerospace and advanced engineering, data analytics, rural productivity, health and care). The bid has a wholly economic focus: other than in references to care, the word “social” does not appear in the document, and there is no acknowledgement of the impacts of the plans on the natural environment.

If the bid succeeds – and at least some of the councils are treating the whole exercise with a degree of caution – decision-making on the plans and services covered by the bid will be sucked upwards from the councils and the people they represent. How the combined authority will balance the interests of, say, Plymouth with those of people in the Mendips will be discussed in officer-led groups behind closed doors – because that is the only way “partnership” working can be made to operate in practice. The need to prepare for joint meetings gives authority officers huge influence over agendas and decisions because of the need to coordinate positions and identify common solutions in advance of meetings.

The combined authority itself will be made up of leaders of the constituent councils and others. It will not be directly elected. Trying to influence its decisions will be next to impossible for individuals and community groups. The bid’s economic focus ignores environmental and community questions completely, so being able to provide a counter-balance is hugely important. As it is, the bid’s environmental credentials are defined by the partnership’s LEP-led role as a cheerleader for the new Hinkley Point nuclear power station.

Other devolution bids across England generate similar challenges. At a time when disillusion with our politics is at an all-time high, it is puzzling – to put it mildly – that decision-making is to move even further away from the people most affected

NOTES:

[1] The map of LEP areas at http://www.lepnetwork.net/the-network-of-leps/ shows just how large the area is.

[2] An excellent House of Commons briefing note (July 2016) provides a concise guide to LEPs including reviews of their performance – see http://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/sn05651.pdf

[3] See http://www.local.gov.uk/non-met-commission

[4] The bid document is at https://new.devon.gov.uk/democracy/files/2016/01/Heart-of-the-South-West-Devolution-Prospectus.pdf

https://petercleasby.com/2016/09/30/devolution-is-not-control/

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Accountability, Devolution, Hinkley C, Local Enterprise Partnership

British public will pay decommissioning costs of Hinkley C

There will be some VERY happy nuclear-vested LEP members who will surely be hoping to cash in there when the time comes and their grandchildren are running their companies!

“The French and Chinese companies that are to build the £18bn Hinkley Point C nuclear power station will have to pay up to £7.2bn to dismantle and clean it up. [but read further – the cost is built in to the price we will pay them for electricity generated].

Documents published yesterday reveal for the first time how much the developers, EDF and China General Nuclear Power Group (CGN), will have to pay to decommission the plant, beginning in 2083.

The new reactors in Somerset will be unique in British nuclear history, as they are the first for which the operator will have to pay to make good the site afterwards.

“Waste transfer contracts signed today mean that, for the first time in the UK, the full costs of decommissioning and waste management associated with the new power station are set aside during generation and are included in the price of the electricity,” EDF said in a statement.

Decommissioning costs ate up around half the budget for the now-disbanded department of energy and climate change, after the liabilities for cleaning up old nuclear plants were effectively nationalised in 2004 and 2005 when two companies faced financial problems.

The Hinkley Point C decommissioning costs are estimated at £5.9bn to £7.2bn, with the dismantling of the plant expected to begin in 2083. The government, EDF and CGN anticipate the winding up of the new reactors will continue well into the 22nd century. The plant is expected to be fully decommissioned “from 2138” when the final spent fuel is disposed of.

Experts said the cost estimate was likely to be on the low side. “The reality in terms of decommissioning is that it always costs more than people say,” said Dr Paul Dorfman, of the Energy Institute at University College London.

He claimed that the precedent of the government taking ownership of the liabilities of British Nuclear Fuels Limited and British Energy more than a decade ago showed that the government would be forced to shoulder the costs if Hinkley’s developers had a shortfall.

The body charged with dismantling 17 of Britain’s old nuclear power plants puts the cost of cleanup at £117bn over 100 years in its latest annual report, more than twice the cost estimated a decade ago. A large proportion of the cost is due to the complexity of Sellafield.

The business department also admitted that large scale solar power and onshore windfarms could produce electricity for less than the price agreed for Hinkley, as the National Audit Office said in the summer.

But officials suggested there would be additional costs to the renewable alternatives. “There would be significant upgrades to the grid required (such as connection and planning costs) as well as increased costs to keep the system in balance,” said the ‘Value for money assessment’.

Greenpeace UK executive director, John Sauven, said: “We now have it straight from the horse’s mouth. Increasingly cheaper renewable energy sources do indeed offer better value for money to British bill-payers than Hinkley.

“The government tries to obfuscate the advantages of solar and wind by throwing in extra costs for grid upgrades and balancing the energy system. But there’s no evidence anywhere in the documents to back up their assumptions.”

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/sep/30/hinkley-point-c-developers-face-72bn-cleanup-bill-at-end-of-nuclear-plants-life

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Devolution, Hinkley C, Local Enterprise Partnership

French company gets big Hinkley C contracts

French nuclear group Areva (AREVA.PA) said on Thursday it has won contracts worth over 5 billion euros (£4.32 billion) to provide various services at Britain’s $24 billion Hinkley Point nuclear project.

The deal to build Britain’s first new nuclear power station in decades at Hinkley Point was signed behind closed doors in London earlier on Thursday in a private ceremony.

Areva said the subcontracts include among others, a long-term fuel supply agreement, and the delivery of the two nuclear steam supply systems, from design and supply to commissioning.

The company will also provide material for the fuel fabrication, producing uranium and providing conversion and enrichment services at Hinkley Point.

http://feeds.reuters.com/~r/Reuters/UKTopNews/~3/gfU-JvCSFbA/uk-britain-nuclear-areva-contracts-idUKKCN11Z2KB

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Accountability, Devolution, EDDC, Hinkley C, Local Enterprise Partnership

“Working with the willing” in devolution deals

The post below cites former Labour minister John Healey as saying that his government got devolution wrong but this government has got it right by “working with the willing”.

Owl finds this a chilling phrase in politics. Working with those who are willing to do what exactly?

We have never been given the story of how a bunch of businessmen and women with vested interests suddenly found themselves working together as something called the Local Enterprise Partnership. There is no back story, no minutes of meetings where they were chosen (Were they chosen? Who by? When? How?), no paper trail about it all hooked up as a package that slipped into full being.

How come very quickly Cornwall decided to go it alone when its natural partner would have been Devon? How come Somerset decided to pall up with Devon and not Avon and Bristol?

The reason for that at least for that is clear. Devon businesses in the LEP are highly invested in nuclear activities or training for nuclear jobs or building houses around the nuclear sites or servicing the site through parent companies or subsidiaries. Whilst it might have worked better for Somerset to pall up with Bristol and Avon – Somerset was definitely “working with the willing”!

With Hinkley C having French and Chinese construction and personnel, it will be interesting to see whether those two partners are willing to work with each other, let alone Somerset or more remote Devon!

We can’t see the Chinese workers bedding down at the Premier Inn at Exmouth each night or the French workers choosing Honiton over Bristol for their nights out on the town!

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Accountability, Devolution, Local Enterprise Partnership

Labour owns up to devolution mess when last in government – Tories continue it

“Former Labour minister John Healey has said that devolution under the last Labour government was “hamstrung” by efforts to develop proposals that could apply across the whole country.

The former Treasury and local government minister was speaking at a fringe event hosted by Core Cities UK, London Councils and the Mayor of London’s office at the Labour Party conference in Liverpool.

He said the current government had got the approach right by deciding to “work with the willing”.

He stated: “We actually hamstrung ourselves in our period in government when we looked at devolution, because we felt we needed to have a blueprint that was consistent right across the country.

“But eventually it won’t work, it can’t work, in the same way in all parts. We got too hung up on institutional arrangements, geographical footprints. The case we should make needs to concentrate on what we most want to change, be determined to do it and then make the case for the devolution that helps us do us.”

Healey said that his political imperative would be to show how a Labour council and a Labour-led city makes a difference and can reach devolution deals with Whitehall “rather than try to come up with a plan that is all encompassing, which I think is part of the problem that we had for a lot of the time we were in government”.

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2016/09/labours-devolution-efforts-were-hamstrung-one-size-fits-all-approach

“Work with the willing” – willing for what we ask here in the Heart of the South West.

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Devolution, Economy, Local Enterprise Partnership

Who wants to go to the LEP annual conference – tickets here

DATE AND TIME
Mon 3 October 2016
13:30 – 18:00

LOCATION
Sandy Park
Sandy Park Way
Exeter

“Heart of the South West LEP’s Annual Conference”

We would like to invite you to register for the HotSW LEP’s Annual Conference, which this year will be held in the afternoon of Monday 3rd October at Sandy Park, near Exeter (EX2 7NN).

The Conference is an opportunity to meet with the wider LEP partnership and to network with other stakeholders. It is a free event that is aimed at the private, public and third sectors, and that will include an update on present economic issues for our area – including Brexit and Devolution – and a look at what is planned for the future. This year the focus will be around Productivity and particularly in relation to the ‘people’ and supply chain elements.

We are expecting that demand will be high and recommend that you reserve your place early. To this end the registration link above is to reserve your place at the Conference. Once registered and nearer the date, you will be sent a link to book your preferred seminar sessions and optional attendance at the AGM.

The following is a guide for the afternoon:

1.30pm to 1.45pm – Arrival at Sandy Park – Registration and refreshments

2pm – Conference starts, followed by seminar sessions

5.00pm – Conference closes

5.00pm – 5.15pm – Refreshment break, registration for those attending just for the AGM

5.15pm – 5.45pm – HotSW LEP’s AGM

5.45pm – Finish

Please note that the refreshments that will be provided will be tea / coffee with biscuits etc.”

https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/heart-of-the-south-west-leps-annual-conference-registration-26536396075?aff=eiosprexshrefabk&ref=eiosprexshrefabk

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

DCC, Devolution, EDDC, Local Enterprise Partnership, Tourism

Tourism is expected to have a much higher growth rate than the national economy as a whole. Do our councils and Local Enterprise Partnership reflect this in their local plans or devolution plans? No. Why? You will need to ask them – provided you can drag them all away from their high-end housing development and nuclear industry interests first.

LGA press release 27 September 2016

“New research by the LGA has found that the tourist industry is set to grow by nearly 3% every year over the next decade.

The LGA is urging the Government to keep up the momentum on agreeing devolution proposals to further boost tourism-led growth.

English tourism can soar under devolution, say councils
LGA press release 27 September 2016

English tourism can soar under devolution deals with new figures revealing the tourist industry is set to grow by nearly three per cent every year over the next decade, research by the Local Government Association revealed today.

With tourism emerging as one of the fastest growing industries, the LGA said local areas can use the devolution agenda to turn their cities and counties into thriving tourist hotspots for the growing ‘staycation’ market and overseas visitors.

To mark World Tourism Day, new research commissioned by the LGA shows that domestic tourism is predicted to grow 2.9 per cent every year over the next decade, which is more than the overall economy (2.5 per cent).

It follows latest industry figures which reveal there were 103 million overnight trips in England in 2015, an 11 per cent increase compared to 2014, and an 8 per cent increase in expenditure compared to 2014, with a total spend of £19.6 billion.

Regions which saw the biggest increases in overnight trips include the West Midlands (+22 per cent), Yorkshire (+20 per cent), the South West (+14 per cent) and London (+14 per cent).

Councils are already enjoying huge economic returns on investment in tourism through ambitious projects. They include:

· Plymouth City Council – Plymouth has enjoyed visitor growth of over 28 per cent since 2008 and an increased spend of 23 per cent in turn has helped to increase overall jobs in the sector by 92 per cent to just over 8,000 – 7 per cent of the local economy. The strategy has included being re-branded as ‘Britain’s Ocean City’ in 2013 ahead of the 400th anniversary in 2020 of the Mayflower sailing which is to be celebrated on a globally significant scale

· Staffordshire County Council – adopting a new strategic approach to sport, “Sportshire”, is paying dividends for tourism. Hosting Ironman Staffordshire 70.3 and the UK Corporate Games, both in 2015, attracted 16,000 visitors into the area, creating an economic boost of £5.4 million. Staffordshire secured a three-year contract for the long-distance Ironman triathlon

· Liverpool City Council – to boost the city’s tourism industry, which is worth nearly £4 billion a year, the council is using its borrowing power to provide an upfront capital grant which is repaid by reduced revenue funding, or increased lease charges if it’s a council-owned building. The grant is used for venue refurbishments, resulting in a boost in revenue and visitors, making them more sustainable. To date, The Philharmonic Hall, Royal Court Theatre and Unity Theatre have all benefited.
The LGA is urging the Government to keep up the momentum on agreeing devolution proposals to further boost tourism-led growth. The recently announced Tourism Action Plan is a step in the right direction, but much more could be done to put the levers of growth in the hands of local leaders.

By focusing on improving transport, infrastructure, skills and business support – all central to devolution deals and key to boosting tourism – combined authorities and other similar arrangements can make better, more efficient decisions to maximise tourist revenue.

Crucially, councils and local partners can link these policy levers to enhance the distinctiveness of destinations, including high quality attractions and skilled labour to drive England’s tourist economy and unlock further growth.

With UK residents increasingly holidaying – and spending – at home rather than abroad, this is a trend that devolution deals can exploit. The UK’s tourism deficit – the difference between money spent by UK residents holidaying abroad and money spent in the UK by overseas visitors – has fallen from a peak of over £20 billion in 2008, to under £14 billion in 2014.

Even with this trend, less than 40 per cent of England’s total holiday spend goes on domestic tourism, which offers significant potential growth for devolved powers to target by offering high quality destination experiences that will keep people holidaying at home and persuade international visitors to London to extend their stay to the rest of the country.

Reports of a jump in tourist spending following a softening in the pound post-Brexit further underline the potential of tourism for local economies.

Councils will also be able to keep all locally raised business rates by 2020 which will further incentivise councils to attract and retain businesses in local growth sectors, including tourism.

Cllr Ian Stephens, Chair of the LGA’s Culture, Tourism and Sport Board, said:

“Councils have long recognised, and supported, the value of tourism to local growth, jobs and prosperity, which the devolution agenda should be primed to exploit.

“The tourist economy is one of the UK’s fastest growing economic sectors and councils have the opportunity to align their devolved responsibilities to improve their tourism offer to best showcase their unique identity and heritage, from food and drink and natural landscape to historic buildings and traditional festivals.

“Local areas have already capitalised on recent tourism opportunities and councils can use devolution deals to improve transport, infrastructure, skills and business support, which are crucial levers to maximise the tourist pound and economic growth.

“Decisions about these critical success factors for boosting tourism are best taken at the local level, which devolution deals stand to make possible through combined authorities and similar local governance arrangements.

“The move to full localisation of business rates in 2020 means that it will be even more important for councils to support and attract tourism-related businesses, where this is a local growth priority.

“There is significant growth potential from tourism and our analysis highlights an opportunity for increasing staycations in order to close the UK’s large tourism deficit.

“By creating the wider conditions for the visitor economy to thrive, local communities also benefit from a successful local visitor economy with an increased choice of facilities such as places to eat out, local shops, events and exhibitions, as well as conservation of local heritage and the natural landscape.

“The Government needs to keep up the momentum on agreeing devolution proposals to further boost tourism-led growth and transform local economies.”

Case studies

Plymouth City Council

Plymouth re-branded as ‘Britain’s Ocean City’ in 2013 as part of its first ever Visitor Strategy launched in 2010. With the 400th anniversary of the Mayflower sailing in 2020 the city aims to grow visitors to the city by 20 per cent and spend by 25 per cent up to 2020 in line with a huge ambition to commemorate the anniversary on a globally significant scale.

Since the baseline figures were established in 2008 visitor growth of over 28 per cent and increased spend of 23 per cent in turn has helped to increase overall jobs in the sector by 92 per cent to just over 8,000 – 7 per cent of the local economy. Looking forward to 2020, Plymouth has aligned itself behind the Mayflower plans and has in process unprecedented capital development of over £70 million as well as a major commitment of over £2.25 million revenue from the city council to supporting the project. Projects include a new hotel development, coach hub, re-designed railway station and cruise terminal as well as a £40 million extension by British Land to their Drake Circus development. It is estimated that more than 25 million Americans are descended from the Mayflower pilgrims and Plymouth is working closely with the national partnership to ensure that the UK benefits not just in 2020 but significantly beyond.

Staffordshire County Council

Developing from the City Deal process, Staffordshire County Council has adopted a new strategic approach to sport, “Sportshire”, which is attracting visitors and boosting the local economy through major events and sporting infrastructure.

The main aims were to increase the number of overnight stays and subsequent visitor spend, which are low in comparison to West Midlands counterparts, and attract more high spending visitors. In Year 1 (2015), this was achieved by hosting Ironman Staffordshire 70.3 and the UK Corporate Games. These events attracted 16,000 visitors into the area, creating an economic impact of £5.4 million. Staffordshire secured a three-year contract for the long-distance Ironman triathlon.

Liverpool City Council

Liverpool’s tourism industry is worth nearly £4 billion a year. One of its biggest challenges is funding cultural organisations which play a vital role in tourism landscape. Invest to Save is an initiative in which the council uses its borrowing power to provide an upfront capital grant which is repaid by reduced revenue funding, or increased lease charges if it’s a council-owned building. The grant is used for much-needed improvements to the physical condition of a venue, resulting in a financial and visitor number boost, making them more sustainable.

To date, The Philharmonic Hall, Royal Court Theatre and Unity Theatre have all benefited. This work directly supports the City Region’s plan to grow the visitor economy’s value by £200 million by 2020.

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Accountability, Devolution, EDDC, Inequality, Local Enterprise Partnership, Transparency

“Inclusive Devolution”

Here are the main points of the RSA publication referred to in the previous post:

A new policy framework to promote inclusive growth

The report proposes a policy framework based on the following elements:

Integrating economic and social policy — we argue for a model which combines economic and social policy to generate inclusive growth. That means integrating people-focused policies on skills, family support and education with economic development strategies linked to investment and industry policy.

Devolution that is social as well as economic — up until now, devolution to cities has mostly related to strategic economic functions. The next phase of devolution needs to have a much stronger social policy focus so that public service reform can support local growth.

More funding to support inclusive growth at local level — the context for devolution so far has been fiscal neutrality and austerity. The establishment of investment funds and the transfer of economic functions has been good for cities, but at the same time their overall revenue budgets have shrunk substantially. The next phase of what we call ‘grown up devolution’ will need to provide more funding for social and capital projects.

Prioritising prevention and early intervention — it is widely accepted that we spend too much on picking up the pieces of social and economic failure. Now is the time to begin the process of shifting the balance of spending towards prevention and early intervention, so that public services can support inclusive growth, rather than respond to the lack of it.

View at Medium.com

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Accountability, Consultation, DCC, Democracy, Devolution, EDDC, Local Enterprise Partnership, Small and Medium businesses, Spin, Transparency

Comments

Devolution “myths” not myths at all, says Devon County Councillor

From the Facebook page of Lib Dem Councillor for Totnes, Robert Vint:

“On Monday Devon County Councillors were presented with a “Myth Busting” training session on Devolution. On Thursday there was a repeat session for South Hams District Councillors.

The “Myths” they were attempting to “bust” were that the Devolution process was led by the LEP, was undemocratic, would result in local government reorganisation / centralisation etc.

The explanations – or non-explanations – only strengthened my concerns. It was confirmed that there would be no public consultation on the economic development plan but only on the Combined Authority proposal and that the LEP had played a central role.

I asked why the plan did not start by identifying local needs such as rural unemployment and affordable housing then consult communities and small businesses on how to tackle these problems. They said not to worry as this was an outline economic plan – but later they confirmed that there would be no consultation on the economic plan or any opportunity to change it.

We have a Devolution Prospectus written by the few big businesses in the LEP to serve their own needs rather than those of the wider community of Devon and Somerset. This has then been rubberstamped by local authorities who did not have the staff, time or vision to rewrite it to meet our real needs and who failed to consult residents and small and family businesses. As a result we will be subjected, without any opportunity to comment, to a local economic development strategy that will serve the wealthy rather than the majority and that will fail to provide jobs where they’re needed or houses to the people who need them most.

In contrast the RSA – Royal Society of Arts – outlines how we should be delivering genuine, fair and inclusive devolution (see below).

The UK’s economic status-quo has resulted in huge sections of our population being ‘left behind’. So the RSA are proposing a radical programme of devolution, inclusive industrial strategies and investment in human capital to create a more inclusive, equal society.

https://www.thersa.org/discover/publications-and-articles/rsa-blogs/2016/09/inclusive-growth-proposals

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Devolution, Local Enterprise Partnership

May and devolution

“In a lengthy article in the Manchester Evening News, the prime minister said she was “absolutely committed” to devolving powers away from Westminster.

She said: “I don’t want to see our country dependent on one city any more. I want to get all of our great cities firing on all cylinders to rebalance our economy.”

Right – according to this model, ditch the LEP and have two “economic powerhouses” based on Plymouth and Exeter! (It is already happening secretly behind the usual closed doors – more on that soon).

Somerset? It doesn’t have a city, so let their city be Hinkley C!

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/sep/20/theresa-may-confirms-commitment-northern-powerhouse-george-osborne

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Devolution, Hinkley C, Local Enterprise Partnership

Hello, Hinkley C, goodbye green energy (and the NHS)

The champagne corks will be popping at our Local Development Partnership (though we can’t tell you where that will be as they don’t tell us where their offices are). Many pockets to be lined by those members with nuclear interests.

Green energy will now be the Cinderella and the money that could have got our NHS out of debt will now be poured into Chinese and French pockets.

And our LEP can hold us all to ransom as it holds all our purse strings.

Happy days.

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Devolution, Inequality, Local Enterprise Partnership

Voluntary sector demands to be involved in devolution bids

Dream on people – you are seen as a cost not a benefit or asset to our “growth led” devolution bid.

“A group of more than 30 voluntary sector leaders has set out a statement of principles for devolution across England that includes a call for greater involvement of voluntary organisations in local decision-making.

At a summit held in London on 7 September, the group set out steps that should be taken to put people at the heart of devolution in England.

Among the 16 points – covering voice and advocacy, financing devolution, and public service reform – was a call for an agreement between devolved authorities, elected officials and the voluntary sector around the design, commissioning, funding and delivery of public services.

Under the government’s devolution programme, combined authorities have reached a series of deals with Whitehall that will see them take on more powers over services including transport, planning and skills. These deals are in place in Greater Manchester, Sheffield, Birmingham and Liverpool and the Tees Valley, although a deal for the North East Combined Authority was rejected by four of the seven councils involved last week.

At the Devolution and the Voluntary Sector Summit, leaders said devolved areas must be given the time and resources to create new democratic methods. The summit was convened by Charity Finance Group, Children England, Locality and the National Association for Voluntary and Community Action.

These new methods should not be tied to pre-existing structures and processes. There also needed to be a commitment to local and specialist voluntary organisations to help engage people and communities in devolved decisions. Of particular focus in this endeavour should be disadvantaged and disenfranchised groups.

The group expressed the view that no financial settlement should be agreed with an area until there had been an opportunity to map and assess the local needs and resources (including voluntary and private sector assets). Ahead of the government’s implementation of full business rates localisation, the summit also called on ministers to develop a method of distributing resources post-devolution that ensured that inequalities were not locked in.

The statement called for devolution to be based on the principle of subsidiary, as well as highlighting the need for an agreement between devolved authorities, elected officials and the voluntary sector about the design, commissioning, funding and delivery of public services.

Services should be commissioned on the basis of long term social outcomes rather than short term financial pressures, the group stated. Meanwhile, central government must articulate at the beginning of the process how it is accountable for services that will be devolved.

Caron Bradshaw, chief executive of Charity Finance Group, said the vision for devolution could reset the high-profile devolution drive with full involvement of the voluntary sector as an active partner to support communities.

Locality chief executive Tony Armstrong added: “There is a clear opportunity for devolution to harness the capacity and ideas of local people and organisations to transform their communities. But there is a risk that the devolution agenda is missing this potential.

“The devolution summit has been an important moment for us to come together as a sector, and think about what good devolution looks like and the principles that are essential for making this happen.”

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Hinkley C, Local Enterprise Partnership

The Chinese way of doing business?

Our LEP and the Government need to keep their eyes wide open if Hinkley C goes ahead according to this report!

” … China’s growing industrial sector has been hard on the aluminum producers in the United States. In 2000 there were 23 smelters operating nationwide, now there are only five.

So when an aluminum executive named Jeff Henderson got wind of a giant stockpile of Chinese aluminum just below the U.S border with Mexico, he decided to commission a plane to check it out.

What did they find?

Six percent of the world’s aluminum, worth some $2 billion and enough to make 77 billion beer cans, according to the Journal’s fascinating report.

The revelation led to tensions between U.S. trade authorities and China, as U.S. industry executives insist that the metal is linked to Liu Zhongtian, who runs China Zhongwang Holdings, an enormous industrial aluminum company.

U.S. industry officials allege the metal got there as part of a scheme to evade trade restrictions. The idea was to move aluminum through Mexico into the U.S. where it could benefit from provisions in the North American Free Trade Agreement.

“These things have nothing to do with me,” Liu told the Journal, although the results of the investigation cast doubt on that claim.

Aluminum manufacturing is subsidized in China, and so Chinese firms were able to undercut U.S. producers; the United States responded by setting up tariffs to make domestic aluminum more attractive.

Routing Chinese aluminum through Mexico was a way to get around those tariffs.

Things went awry when a one of Liu’s alleged business partners Po-Chi “Eric” Shen, started to gain attention over some of his erratic practices, which the Journal report highlighted and included spending fortunes on dubious expenses like $70 million worth of red diamonds and rare Ferraris.

The relationship allegedly deteriorated quickly — Shen made headlines in 2014 when he wrecked Liu’s sports car while vacationing in Italy, and was rescued by Rowan Atkinson, of Mr. Bean fame.

The metal may never make it to the United States, in fact there are currently plans to ship it back to Asia, this time Vietnam.”

http://uk.businessinsider.com/a-chinese-billionaire-may-have-hidden-6-of-the-worlds-aluminum-in-the-mexican-desert-2016-9?amp?r=US&IR=T

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Accountability, Democracy, Devolution, Local Enterprise Partnership

“Four out of seven north-east councils vote against devolution Sunderland, Durham, South Tyneside and Gateshead reject proposals including election of north-eastern mayor”

” … Paul Watson, chair of the North East Combined Authority (Neca) of the seven councils, described the vote as disappointing. He said: “Each of the seven councils which make up the Neca has always made clear that they support the principle of devolution for the north-east. Following the outcome of the EU referendum and the subsequent changes within government, council leaders have been equally clear that to move forward, the new government must provide assurances regarding the terms of the region’s devolution deal.

“Extensive discussions and negotiations have taken place with government and within the region over recent months but unfortunately, despite our best efforts, it has not been possible to reach an agreement which all of the seven local authorities feel able to support. Although this is disappointing we will continue to work together with government to achieve our ambition of a stronger regional economy with improved opportunities for residents and businesses.” …

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/sep/06/north-east-councils-vote-against-devolution-sunderland-durham-south-tyneside-gateshead

Compare and contrast with Devon and Somerset where councils are happy to vote like sheep for devolution, knowing almost nothing about, having been given minimal information by their Leaders and their business pals on the Local Enterprise Partnership.

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Accountability, Democracy, Developers/ Development, Devolution, EDDC, Hinkley C, Local Enterprise Partnership, Transparency

Comments

“Hinkley Point deal out of date and too expensive, says energy chief “

The head of energy giant ScottishPower has waded into the row over Hinkley Point, insisting that the controversial subsidy deal for EDF’s proposed nuclear plant should be renegotiated because it is too expensive.

Keith Anderson, the firm’s chief corporate officer, said the deal, provisionally agreed by the Government in 2013 following lengthy negotiations, no longer made sense in the light of lower gas and offshore wind costs.

“It looks like a contract that was written five years ago on a business case that was probably pulled together 10 years ago. It looks out of line with what’s going on in the market now,” he said. …”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/09/03/hinkley-point-deal-out-of-date-and-too-expensive-says-energy-chi/

The article raises very serious concerns about the business sense of our Local Enterprise Partnership, which seems blind to the economic realities of the Hinkley C project.

We know, of course, that many members of our LEP have enormous direct and indirect investment in the project and presumably need it to continue to allow their own interests to thrive.

But is it in OUR interest to allow them to trouser likely profits from such an unbalanced deal?

They will say that they are doing this for our benefit, of course – more jobs, more houses, etc. But with Brexit we now look towards having fewer people coming to this country from the EU (though exceptions would doubtless be made for French and Chinese workers) and much higher import costs if we do not have free trade in the EU. Plus the business case for renewables is strengthening all the time, especially as battery storage research and implementation has made enormous progress.

Our LEP members know all this but only last week its CEO was telling us how hard he and his members are battling to keep the project going:

http://us4.campaign-archive2.com/?u=4e59660292bd6b4a5c7d7b8a7&id=a36a037523&e=fa5cdb1f1

We have to ask: who are they battling for – and why?

The great scandal of LEPs now lies before us: small (very small) groups of business people who look to their own interests before those of the residents where they live. Often in secret and with minimal or no scrutiny. And who pursue their own interests even when they put them at odds with the majority of people in the areas they purportedly represent.

Our East Devon Business Forum seems to have been a practice run for our Local Enterprise partnership, and we all know how that ended – also coincidentally in the Daily Telegraph:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/9921333/If-I-turn-a-green-field-into-an-estate-then-Im-not-doing-it-for-peanuts.html

Posted by

East Devon Watch

Posted on

Posted under

Devolution, Dunkeswell, Hinkley C, Local Enterprise Partnership

Heart of the South West LEP member doing well in the arms trade

?Good to see LEP board member Nick Ames doing well with his company’s new range of military arms vehicles:

“Dunkeswell-based Supacat is unveiling the Logistic Support and Recovery variants at the DVD2016 show, a two-day event at Millbrook Proving Ground, on Wednesday and Thursday, September 7 and 8, which brings together army staff and industry representatives from the land equipment sector.”

http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/supacat-to-unveil-new-military-vehicles-at-dvd2016-show/story-29679072-detail/story.html

Supacat has also moved into the nuclear sector and is, unsurprisingly backing Hinkley C along with other nuclear-invested board members:

https://www.nsan.co.uk/news/supacat-ltd-expand-nuclear

How long before we see a Nuclear Supercat?

Source: http://tetrahedral.blogspot.com/2009/11/newsflash.html