A Devon farmer and county councillor has criticised the government’s latest Spending Review, warning that it offers “nothing for rural areas and no rural strategy.”

Ella Sampson www.themoorlander.co.uk 

Councillor Cheryl Cottle-Hunkin, Devon County Council’s Cabinet Member for Rural Affairs and Broadband and a fifth-generation farmer in North Devon, said she was “really disappointed” by the Chancellor’s announcements during the review, which she felt focused heavily on urban areas in the North and Midlands.

“There’s nothing for rural areas and no rural strategy,” she said. 

“The loss of the £10 million Rural Services Delivery Grant at short notice was a terrific blow to the county, and although the government has committed to an average of £2.7 billion per year from 2026 to 2029 for sustainable farming and nature recovery, this represents a real-term cut of 2.3 per cent, and within this the NFU has identified a £100 million reduction in farming and countryside programmes including the Environmental schemes.”

Cllr Cottle-Hunkin expressed concern over the future of the Environmental Land Management schemes, which many farmers rely on. 

“It appears likely that the Environmental Land Management schemes will be reduced, especially considering that the current SFI applications (which were reopened following the NFU’s legal challenge over the abrupt closure of SFI applications) were capped at £9,300 per year per farm business.”

She warned the government does not seem to understand the importance of rural communities. 

“The Government does not appear to recognise the vital role our farming and rural communities play in caring for and improving the environment, and supporting jobs and the economy in rurally isolated places, and this concerns me greatly.”

However, she did welcome one U-turn, following pressure from local government. 

“I am pleased that the Government has listened to campaigners including Devon councillors in relation to the winter fuel U-turn after a motion by my fellow Liberal Democrat councillor Alan Connett in September condemned this proposal.”

She said this shows ministers can be swayed: “This suggests that they will listen and are prepared to change when they make unpopular and ill-judged decisions, so we can only hope they do the same and see sense on the farm inheritance tax issue.”

Cllr Cottle-Hunkin described the inheritance tax proposals as “devastating” for farming families, saying: “From the very outset this has caused overwhelming stress and worry within the farming sector with no time to plan for many. Farming is not a job but a way of life, and many farms have been farmed and passed down, along with their inherent knowledge of the land and associated farming practices, through many generations – myself included as a fifth-generation Devon farmer.”

She backed the EFRA Select Committee’s recent call to pause and rework the policy and praised the NFU’s alternative proposal: “The NFU has put forward an alternative ‘clawback’ mechanism which is used in other European countries and would allow working farms to continue as they are, but close loopholes on those purchasing farms simply for inheritance tax reasons.”

“Central Government needs to sit up and listen and understand the disaster they are creating both in terms of food security and the wider impact on our rural areas across the UK if they continue with this devastating policy. We are not backing down on this one – the farming community is united and we won’t give up.”

Cllr Cottle-Hunkin added that ministers should spend more time in Devon to better understand rural issues.

“Perhaps if they spent more time in our beautiful part of the world and had a better understanding of rural areas and food production, they would know that it is our resilient farming communities who have many of the solutions to problems such as Britain’s food security, sustainability and environmental improvements.

“Devon has huge potential and could do so much more with a modest amount of support in the right places, but we are being desperately misunderstood by those making the big decisions in Westminster.”

Earlier this week, Conservative MP for Central Devon and Shadow Chancellor Mel Stride echoed these concerns, saying that the Chancellor “has barely mentioned farming”.

“It’s not enough to hit farmers with the family farm tax,” Mr Stride said during the Spending Review debate on Wednesday, 11 June. 

“Today the choice is to make further cuts to vital grants on which many farmers rely.

“It is a huge betrayal of the farming communities, and some of the government’s MPs in rural constituencies will have to explain this [to voters].”

Labour, however, defended its record, claiming the funding package demonstrates its “steadfast commitment to farming, food security, and nature’s recovery.”

Spending Review documents stated: “The government will invest more than £2.7 billion per year in sustainable farming and nature recovery from 2026–27 until 2028–29. Farmers will benefit from an average of £2.3 billion through the Farming and Countryside Programme and up to £400 million from additional nature schemes.”

Parliament committee slams water company culture and urges tougher action.

Committees – UK Parliament

A failing water sector in which “water companies increasingly look like financial institutions rather than businesses servicing monopolised critical infrastructure” is in need of “root and branch reform”, according to a new report by Parliament’s Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee.

• Read the report [HTML]
• Read the report [PDF]
• Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee

MPs say there is a cultural problem in the sector and call for “a major refresh of the incentives and drivers” and “much more regulated management of financial incentives for senior executives”.  

The report follows the Committee’s evidence sessions with the leadership of ten of England and Wales’ major water and sewerage companies in 2025.  

The MPs’ ‘Priorities for water sector reform’ report makes recommendations to the Independent Water Commission, ahead of its Chair, Sir Jon Cunliffe, publishing his final report next month. The Committee will put their findings to Sir Jon in an evidence session tomorrow (Tuesday 17 June). 

Culture, ownership, leadership and bonuses  

The report urges the Water Commission to consider a variety of models of corporate ownership, which they say “could offer a better culture of responsible leadership.” 

MPs want the Commission to “determine how regulators can better vet or veto potential owners of water companies to prevent bad actors from running critical national infrastructure”.  

The report notes that bonuses totalling millions of pounds have been repeatedly paid to senior executives over many years, despite poor performance, which they say “seriously diminish trust” and may fail to incentivise improvement. 

MPs want the Commission to consider reforms to “ensure that the right people are put into senior positions” as they call for greater oversight from Ofwat before appointments are made and bonuses are paid, as well as “clearer statutory expectations on the criteria for bonuses”.  

The report states that “privatisation has almost certainly weakened the accountability of the water industry to the public”, noting that water data is often not public in practice. MPs want water companies to be legally obliged to publish performance, environmental and financial data on a regular basis. 

Financial management and structures  

The report today says there has been “serious economic mismanagement of companies” and calls for greater regulation of debt accumulation and debt management, saying that “a culture of relying on debt must never be allowed to arise again”.    

On the issue of dividends, MPs call for safeguards “to prevent egregious dividend payments” and say that examples of excessive dividends contrasted with poor performance, are “symptomatic of a culture of profiteering over duties to regulators and customers”. 

Stating that “investors need to see stable but modest long-term returns”, the report stresses that the regulatory system should “ensure that services for customers and the environment take priority”. MPs say that dividends should correlate to a company’s performance. 

On the question of special administration, MPs believe it should be a last resort given the high initial cost to government but say “it is unclear whether allowing a failing company to struggle on and accumulate progressively more debt is a better outcome than assuming temporary national control more quickly, with the associated costs that it could incur”. 

The Price Review Process and the regulatory environment  

The Committee supports the Water Commission’s focus on creating a better regulatory framework, but says “a good framework is nothing without well-equipped regulators to act against bad actors and poor behaviours”.   

MPs want the Commission to ensure that data on water is as open as possible and believe that regulators should gain automatic access to water companies’ data relevant to their regulatory functions. 

They say that the current regulatory system, which has not incentivised enough investment in water infrastructure, impacts both short-term resilience against asset failures and long-term water security. The report cites that, despite well-known population and climate pressures, such as drought in the South and South East, efforts to ensure future water supplies are regarded by some stakeholders as insufficient.   

MPs say that if the price review process is to be retained, it needs to be reformed. They want the Commission’s proposals to result in a price review process and regulatory system that encourages better resilience, to protect customers from short term shocks and to ensure that water resources are protected in the future.   

Relationship with consumers and need for single social tariff  

During its inquiry, the Committee heard of instances of inadequate communication from some water companies during events such as water outages or raw sewage entering homes and was particularly concerned to hear of vulnerable customers not receiving the support they needed. MPs also say that “it is generally thought that levels of compensation after these events are too low and easy to avoid paying.”   

The report urges Defra and the Water Commission to address the issues of local coordination with key bodies and communication with customers, and to consider the introduction of statutory standards to “create a customer-first culture” among water companies.  

The Committee wants the Commission to make provisions to establish a single social tariff to protect low-income households and for the Commission to establish how effectively water poverty is being tackled. 

Chair comment (The Rt Hon Mr Alistair Carmichael is the Liberal Democrat MP for Orkney and Shetland)

“The water sector has a serious culture problem. Water companies are the keepers of a vital national infrastructure. They exist to provide an essential service to the public and to protect the environment. But these primary functions seem to have been forgotten. Amidst growing public outrage at the poor performance of water companies, some companies have been paying out high dividends to shareholders and excessive bonuses to their senior executives.   

 “Water companies’ complex and sometimes impenetrable financial structures, with their myriad subsidiaries, holding companies and parent organisations, seem to suggest that their purpose is less to provide a good service to their customers and more to allow them to juggle their finances and their increasingly unsustainable levels of debt.   

“Meanwhile, an ineffective regulatory system has failed to protect customers, the environment and the financial stability of the sector. It has failed to ensure that companies invest in essential infrastructure and it has not encouraged long-term thinking.  

“This has got to stop now. Trust and accountability in the water sector are very low. It is not acceptable that it has fallen to commendable citizen scientists to expose issues with local water resources. Environmental protection and the delivery of a reliable and safe water must be the first priorities of water companies and regulators. 

“We want the country’s water sector to be fit for purpose. Now and in the long-term. The Water Commission has got the opportunity to draw up the root and branch reforms necessary to ensure that the issues plaguing the sector are resolved. It must not shy away from bold proposals.”  

Richard Foord speaking at the end of one of the debates on Lib Dem ammendments but the Government bulldozed them all away.

Only one or two Tories bothered to speak.

Planning and Infrastructure Bill Tuesday 10 June 2025

…….I wish to put it on the record that Devon, which is rightly celebrated across Britain for its rugged coastline, its rolling farmland, its spectacular moorlands and its ancient woodlands, is subject to the diggers of developers who are encouraged by this Government. Although we all need houses and we all need the protection that they afford, this Bill, if enacted, will only damage nature. Nature in Devon is part of who we are and we face a nature crossroads. The Devon Local Nature Partnership tells us that the loss and decline of Devon’s wildlife has accelerated rapidly over the past 50 years. The wooded valleys of the Blackdown hills and the wildflower meadows of East Devon are priceless, but once they are gone, they cannot be brought back.

Yesterday in the Tea Room, we were talking about the darkening clouds of the international system and how this Government are having to deal with such grave matters of state. Somebody then pointed out that, never mind grappling with wars and conflict, we cannot even create a system where a £44 swift brick is put in a new house to encourage nature in our rural areas.

Healthy natural systems underpin our economy and our communities, but unless we restore nature, we will have nothing left. Building homes does not need to come at the cost of nature. We must build in the right places with nature embedded at the heart of planning.

Chancellor Rachel Reeves did not mention Send deficits in her spending review speech, but documents released later pledged clarification in the autumn.

Devon’s accumulated deficit of more than £130 million is greater than the council’s cash reserves.

Audit committee to hold an extraordinary meeting next month to discuss the issue in more detail.

Bradley Gerrard, Local Democracy Reporter www.devonlive.com

Fears have been raised about Devon County Council’s ability to start its budget-setting process amid ongoing uncertainty around its huge special needs deficit.

Many councils across the country, including Devon, were hoping for clarity from the government about what it will do about roughly £6 billion of special educational needs and disabilities (Send) deficits nationwide.‌

The previous government allowed councils to effectively ringfence these deficits out their annual accounts, but that permission – officially called the statutory override – ends next March unless it is extended or an alternative solution created.‌

What that means is a council’s Send deficit will be moved back onto its balance sheet.

In Devon’s case, at more than £130 million, it is greater than the council’s cash reserves.

Addressing the audit committee this week, the council’s finance director Angie Stewart said if no government action is taken it would put its finances at risk.

“This is not unique to Devon, but we have to deal with our own issues,” she said.

“We must be mindful of what the government is going to do with the end of the statutory override approaching.”

Chancellor Rachel Reeves did not mention Send deficits in her spending review speech, but documents released later pledged clarification in the autumn.

Donna Manson, the council’s chief executive, said the lack of any clarity is worrying.

“I have concerns about the ability of the council to set a budget for next year, as there are question marks on whether the Send deficit will be moved or not, and that has a significant impact on what we look at as an organisation,” she said.

“I consider this a matter or urgency as we did not hear what we expected to in the spending review.”

Committee’s chair Cllr Alan Connett (Liberal Democrat, Exminster & Haldon) expressed his frustration given the Send deficit “entirely wipes out our reserves”.

“It is the single-biggest risk to this council that has no mitigation as the government has done nothing to say whether the current arrangement carries on or what they expect us to do,” he said.

“The Safety Valve agreement does nothing to limit the demand that has to be met by the council.”

Devon secured £95 million from the Safety Valve rescue scheme run by the previous government, with funding paid over nine years.

But the current government halted new applications for such grants, meaning the future of existing agreements is unclear.

Cllr Connett agreed to hold an extraordinary meeting next month to discuss the issue in more detail, after worries from some councillors that it would be too long to wait until the next scheduled meeting in September.

Deputy chair Cllr Paul Hayward (Independent, Axminster) said: “I feel a little bit ill at ease given the chief executive’s point, because if the audit committee considers this in September, we will be well into budget preparations [for the 26/27 financial year], and waiting until then could cause problems.

“The item is so significant to this authority that I would be happier with an extraordinary meeting when the government provides clarity [to the council].”

A Devon cabinet member is upset at the lack of detail in the government’s spending review linked to reforms of the special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) system.

Bradley Gerrard www.midweekherald.co.uk

Cllr Denise Bickley (Liberal Democrat, Sidmouth) cabinet member for Send at Devon County Council, said “It was very sad not to hear it mentioned at all and have it bundled in with [upcoming] reviews and plans.

“I am glad it will be dealt with and hope the forthcoming white paper will provide a scheme to fix the things that are going wrong, but that isn’t helping today, which is a shame.”

The spending review provides for a £3.25 billion transformation fund to contribute towards the “reform of the Send system to improve pupil outcomes” – with £760 million between now and 2027/28.

“Details of the government’s intended approach to Send reform will be set out in a schools white paper in the autumn,” the documents said.

Devon’s Send service has built up a cumulative overspend of more than £130 million, and it has around 9,800 education, health and care plans (EHCPs),  documents that specify additional help individual pupils need in school.

These cost an average of £17,000 per plan, according to figures from the county council earlier this year.

The overspend is allowed to be kept outside the council’s main finances, but rules allowing that expire in March unless they are renewed.

At breaking point

Cllr Bickley says the system is “already at breaking point” with mainstream schools being asked to take on more responsibilities, including children with additional needs, but usually without extra financial support.

She added the funding formula also disadvantages Devon, given its rural nature meant its bill for transporting children to school is far higher than an urban council’s.

Cllr Bickley, who has only been in the cabinet post for a few weeks, said the council had, before she took on the role, sent feedback to government about what it wanted to see in the Send review.

“We want to help get what is needed and we need to work with all parts of the education system, as well as parents, to make sure the system works for children,” she added.

“Safeguarding money is important, as we cannot just write a cheque for the needs that there are, but then that means children and parents are not getting what they are entitled to, so it is a very hard balancing act.”

Last year, Devon County Council secured £95 million from the Department for Education through a Safety Valve scheme, which gave grants to councils with large Send overspends.

The money is paid over eight years, and comes with strings attached, such as a requirement for councils to contribute cash to tackling the deficit and improving the service.

Maybe – Owl

Government will fund Cullompton railway station

Two south west MPs have claimed a hard-fought victory in relation to a funding pledge for railway stations in two towns in Devon and Somerset.

Bradley Gerrard, local democracy reporterwww.radioexe.co.uk 

Richard Foord, the Liberal Democrat member for Honiton and Sidmouth, and colleague Gideon Amos, the Taunton and Wellington member, had been hoping the chancellor Rachel Reeves would mention cash for the reopening of Cullompton and Wellington railway stations in her spending review, but were disappointed by the time she left the despatch box having not mentioned the projects.

But Mr Foord has now said the Treasury has confirmed to him that funding would be allocated to the two projects.

Some other local politicians suggested more caution, though, given funding had been pledged for the project before, and then the scheme had been shelved due the change in government after the 2024 general election.

Cllr James Buczkowski, who represents Cullompton on Devon County Council and is also a Mid Devon District Council councillor, said he was “really pleased” the two MPs had continued their fight for the stations, but noted he was “cautiously optimistic”.

“It’s fantastic that we have two MPs who have tirelessly fought for these stations but it was disappointing that the government was not very explicit about the funding for the infrastructure that Cullompton needs,” he said.

“I will wait for the formal announcement from the Department for Transport to see what that entails, and until contracts are signed with them, like they have been with the Cullompton town centre relief road, I won’t get too excited.”

He added it was positive news the funding seemed to be available, but noted that it had been announced and withdrawn previously.

“Until I see wet ink on paper, I’ll hold my celebrations for now,” Cllr Buczkowski said.

Mr Foord has previously argued that the reopening of Cullompton station is vital to make the forthcoming development of around 5,000 homes at Culm Garden Village more sustainable.

“It has been a long campaign over many years, with hundreds of people determined to secure this historic outcome,” Mr Foord said in a statement after claiming to have secured confirmation of the funding from the Treasury.

“Working alongside my Liberal Democrat colleague, Gideon Amos MP, we have raised this issue at the highest levels of government, making a strong case to the chancellor, the transport secretary and the rail minister.”

Mr Foord added that Mid Devon District Council had put together an “irrefutable business case for the reopening of the station.

The MP added the new station would mean residents could “beat congestion in the town”, a reference to Cullompton’s virtually daily queues that form at the town’s junction 28 of the M5.

Rachel Gilmour says government fails the county

Since publication Richard Foord MP for Honiton has now said the Treasury has confirmed to him that funding would be allocated to the two projects.

However, some other local politicians suggested more caution, though, given funding had been pledged for the project before, and then the scheme had been shelved due the change in government after the 2024 general election. – see separate post.

Bradley Gerrard, local democracy reporter www.radioexe.co.uk 

A Devon MP has criticised the government’s spending review for giving “nothing” to Devon.

Liberal Democrat Rachel Gilmour, who represents Tiverton and Minehead, said the announcement failed to support the county or Somerset.

“Nothing for Devon, nothing for Somerset,” she said.

“The spending review feels like a missed opportunity to draw a line under years of Conservative mismanagement, which damaged our public services, left our NHS on its knees, social care and Send teetering on the edge, and school and hospital buildings crumbling – and begin to deliver the change people were promised.

“The government must understand that we can’t fix the NHS if don’t fix social care.”

Ms Gilmour said that while her party welcomed the investment of £29 billion a year into day-to-day NHS spending, she is shocked at the “deafening silence on the social care crisis in the chancellor’s speech”.

“That spoke volumes,” she said.

“NHS investment will be wasted if hospitals can’t discharge patients who don’t need to be there – and if local authorities don’t have the resources to care for people in their homes, preventing them going to hospital in the first place.

“The government must stop dragging its feet and conclude their social care review by Christmas.”

Farmers also seemed to be hit as a result of the spending review, Ms Gilmour claimed.

“Following the budget, this spending review provided the perfect opportunity to change course and back our farmers and rural communities, yet our farmers are still being left to carry the burden of budget cuts,” she said.

“This is unacceptable, and shows that the government have, once again, not considered UK food security.”

Labour claims its funding settlement shows its “steadfast commitment to farming, food security, and nature’s recovery”.

Spending review documents said: “The government will invest more than £2.7 billion per year in sustainable farming and nature recovery from 2026-27 until 2028-29.

“Farmers will benefit from an average of £2.3 billion through the Farming and Countryside Programme and up to £400 million from additional nature schemes.”

On NHS funding, the spending review stated the £29 billion additional annual cash through to 2028/29 would take spending to £226 billion by that year, equivalent to a three per cent annual boost.

“This investment will support the NHS to deliver the government’s Plan for Change commitment, meaning that by the end of the parliament, 92 per cent of patients will start consultant-led treatment for non-urgent conditions within 18 weeks of referral,” the spending review document said.

Since publication Richard Foord has now said the Treasury has confirmed to him that funding would be allocated to the two projects.

However, some other local politicians suggested more caution, though, given funding had been pledged for the project before, and then the scheme had been shelved due the change in government after the 2024 general election. – see separate post.

Bradley Gerrard www.midweekherald.co.uk 

A Devon MP has criticised the government’s spending review’s strategy which he describes as “unacceptably” failing to invest properly in the westcountry.

Richard Foord, the Liberal Democrat member for Honiton and Sidmouth, said the “vast majority” of funding is targeted at the north of England, the Midlands, and London.

Neither Devon nor the south west are mentioned in initial government documents released following the announcement on Wednesday.

“The westcountry has missed out on essential investment yet again,” Mr Foord said.

“Devon wasn’t even mentioned in the spending review, and this is particularly galling given the 15 per cent cut to the rural affairs budget that will hit farmers and nature-friendly farming schemes.

“It will have devastating implications for our environment, for food security and for our rural economy.”

Spending review papers show that the administrative budget for the Department for Food and Rural Affairs, known as Defra, will fall from just over £1 billion this financial year to £962 million by 2029/30.

The government claims its funding settlement shows its “steadfast commitment to farming, food security, and nature’s recovery”.

“The government will invest more than £2.7 billion per year in sustainable farming and nature recovery from 2026-27 until 2028-29,” the documents said.

“Farmers will benefit from an average of £2.3 billion through the Farming and Countryside Programme and up to £400 million from additional nature schemes.”

Mr Foord said he is also “disappointed that the government is doing next to nothing” to resolve the crises in special educational needs and social care.

£15bn in transport projects announced but not here.

UK’s Shared Prosperity Fund (SPF) to help boost local economies (important for Cornwall) is being replaced by a “new local growth fund”, aimed at “mayoral city regions in the North and Midlands”, as well as investing in up to “350 deprived communities across the UK” – maybe, Owl

Spending review frustrates South West transport campaigners

Some politicians, railway campaigners and residents in the South West have expressed disappointment following the Government’s spending review on Wednesday.

Cameron Weldon, Jack Silver www.bbc.co.uk 

Chancellor Rachel Reeves announced £15bn of new investment in transport projects last week, and none of the money has so far been earmarked for named projects in Devon or Cornwall.

Reeves pledged funding for affordable homes, health, defence and schools but any areas in the South West set to benefit have not been spelt out at this stage.

Some campaigners and local residents had hoped her speech would have included additional investment for the region – such as funding to bring back Cullompton’s railway station.

Mid-Devon district councillor Steve Keable said the “political reality” was that Reeves was “playing into her Labour heartland” by prioritising other parts of the country.

Keable, who represents Taw Vale for the Liberal Democrats, said he hoped to find out “over the next few days” what would happen to “the capital funding that Cullompton and Mid Devon are so looking forward to”.

He added that the Cullompton Station project, as well as a separate project to build an additional junction on the M5 south of the town, could not “progress before we get the go ahead”.

Some local residents remain supportive of the railway station project.

“I think it would boost the economy of the town,” one said, adding: “I think it needs some money to push local businesses forward.”

Another local resident said the station was “always used before” and felt “the trains would be used more” if the station was rebuilt.

One mother said it would be “fantastic” if the station came back, adding: “My children would have access to days out – it would be really wonderful for everyone.”

Cornwall Council was awarded £184m in January by the UK’s Shared Prosperity Fund (SPF) to help boost the local economy.

However, the government announced this week it would be replacing the fund, which itself was originally established to replace EU funding by the last Conservative government.

Cornwall previously received about £400m of Objective One funding from the EU as it contained some of the poorest areas in England and Wales.

The government said it planned to establish a “new local growth fund”, external aimed at “mayoral city regions in the North and Midlands”, as well as investing in up to “350 deprived communities across the UK”.

Jayne Kirkham, Labour MP for Truro and Falmouth, said she had been told the money from the fund would be distributed by the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government (MHCLG), adding: “So that will come a bit later.”

“We are hoping that is coming soon and what the SPF might be morphing into,” she said.

Andrew George, Liberal Democrats MP for St Ives, said money for Cornwall should be ring-fenced if “there [was] ring-fencing for other nations”.

George said Cornwall had “rightly” received the investment over the last 25 years.

“Now what we want to happen is to make sure Cornwall is treated as it has been over that period,” he said.

Four cliff falls at Jacob’s Ladder were reported a couple of weeks ago, now Exmouth seafront roads have been closed by “ectoplasm”.

South West Water are not thought to be involved. – Owl

Weird slime covers Devon seaside road as police say it’s like ectoplasm

Shannon Brown www.devonlive.com

A mysterious gooey substance caused a cyclist to crash and end up in hospital and closed a coastal road in Devon.

Queen’s Drive and Maer Lane in Exmouth was closed at the roundabout while clean-up crews dealt with what has been described as a “slime that bears a very strong resemblance to ectoplasm”.

Devon County Council closed the road near the RNLI lifeboat station, Exmouth Police said.

The road was reopened by around 1.30pm.

The weird substance was “super slippery and very gooey” according to Exmouth Police.

One cyclist was taken to hospital after being “taken off” by the slime.

“Devon County Council have closed the Seafront by the lifeboat station, as well as Maer Lane,” Exmouth Police said.

“The roundabout is covered in a mysterious slime that bears a very strong resemblance to ectoplasm!

“It’s super slippery and very gooey. It has already taken off one cyclist who is currently in Exmouth Hospital.

“We do not feel it causes a wider human health implication at this time.”

Exmouth Police continued: “Despite best efforts by colleagues from East Devon District Council street team and Devon County Council Highways, we are unable to either identify of remove the substance.

“It just won’t clean off and its not through lack of serious trying with industrial jet washes, road sweepers, etc (we know that Tony form Exmouth Town Council in his brand new road sweeper would have sorted it)!

“DCC’s closure is pending a specialist environmental cleaning contractor arriving which may be some hours.

“We have considered South West Water activity in the area but it appears to not be their cargo.”

Rapid spreading “Nimbus” Covid wave looks set to hit UK this summer

Scientists fear the UK will see a new Covid wave this summer as the new “Nimbus” variant spreads rapidly around the world.

Tom Bawden inews.co.uk

The NB.1.8.1 variant – which has been dubbed Nimbus – is thought to be more contagious than the other active Covid variants, although there is no evidence that the symptoms are any more severe.

At the same time, the immunity Britons have built up from jabs and previous infections has waned considerably after relatively few cases of Covid over the last six months and a prolonged period of low vaccination levels.

As such, scientists are concerned the Nimbus variant could push up cases in the UK after sending infections soaring in China, Singapore and Hong Kong.

There are already signs that the Nimbus is spreading fast in the UK after its share of new Covid infections (from all variants) jumped from 2 per cent on 28 April to 11 per cent on 12 May, the latest date for which data is available, according to the COVspectrum database.

And while new infections are still well below the peaks seen last summer and autumn, there are signs that cases are starting to pick up in the UK.

New figures from the UK Health Security Agency (UKHSA) today indicate that new Covid infections rose by about 7 per cent in the week to Sunday 1 June – and are around 80 per cent higher than at the start of March.

It is not clear when any new wave would occur or how big it would be, but scientists say they do expect to see a spike in infections over the next month or two.

“We are very likely to see a spike of infections over the next couple of months, possibly by later this month or in July. But it’s difficult to predict the level of this infection wave,” Professor Lawrence Young, a virologist at Warwick University, told The i Paper.

“Population immunity, either from vaccination or previous infection, is waning and, unlike other respiratory viruses such as flu, the Covid virus continues to spread in hot and humid weather.”

“The NB.1.8.1 variant has driven surges of infection in Asia over the spring and is now the dominant strain in Hong Kong and China. It is also spreading in the US and Australia,” Professor Young said.

“Preliminary evidence from lab studies suggests that NB.1.8.1 can infect cells more efficiently than previous variants and that it can partially evade the immune protection provided by antibodies from vaccinated or previously infected people”.

Professor Young urged those who are eligible to take up their booster vaccines as the World Health Organisation has said that jabs still offer good protection against severe disease from infections by the Nimbus variant.

Free vaccines are still available for people aged 75 years and older, residents in care homes for older people, and those aged six months and over with a weakened immune system until 17 June in the current spring booster campaign.

Professor Christina Pagel, a healthcare data analyst at University College London, added: “It’s quite possible we will see a large wave of infection here in two months or so once it becomes dominant.”

Professor Steve Griffin, of Leeds University, said: “The UK has been fortunate not to have a major wave of Covid infections since last autumn. But a recent surge in cases in South East Asian countries, signifies that the relatively quiet spell may be coming to an end.”

Professor Paul Hunter, of University of East Anglia, said: “I guess we will see some increase in reported infections. I doubt case numbers will be as high as this time last year though I cannot be 100 per cent certain on this. But we do need to follow its progress”.

The UKHSA said today that 5.9 per cent of those people with respiratory symptoms testing for Covid in hospitals tested positive in the week to Sunday.

That “positivity rate” compares to 16.2 per cent in last July’s peak and 2.3 per cent at the start of the year.

Positivity rates among hospital patients with symptoms are typically much higher than infection rates in the general population – figures which are not available for the UK outside of winter.

Although the figures are not available for the UK and only cover England, scientists say they give a good indication of trends and across the four nations.

Final push for new Devon railway station near M5

The fate of Cullompton railway station and its sister project in Wellington, Somerset, will be revealed at the end of the government’s spending review on June 11.

Daniel Mumby, Alex Richards www.devonlive.com 

Richard Foord MP (Honiton and Sidmouth) and Gideon Amos MP, (Taunton and Wellington) have been fervently campaigning for the two stations for months, engaging with transport ministers, participating in Westminster Hall debates and organising a parliamentary delegation in April.

Mr Amos raised the issue in the House of Commons on Wednesday (June 4), shortly after the chancellor announced over £15bn for UK-wide transport projects – an announcement which failed to provide any reassurance about the new stations.

“The chief secretary [of the Treasury] will know that the benefits of the Cullompton and Wellington stations project would bring tens of thousands of people to the city, the metro region and the Cardiff-Bristol-Exeter corridor. Thanks to a cost-benefit ratio of almost 4:1, will he acknowledge the strength of the case for that project, as set out in the letter he received from his honourable friends the members for Weston-super-Mare (Dan Aldridge), for North Somerset (Sadik Al-Hassan) and for Exeter (Steve Race) – and from me and my honourable friend Richard Foord?”.

Somerset Council has thrown its support behind the proposed new stations at Cullompton and Wellington which are anticipated to draw tens of thousands.

Planning permission was given in May 2024 by the council for a housing development on Nynehead Road, which includes provisions for station access, and detailed designs for the spine road, featuring pedestrian and cycle links, as well as plans for an inviting ‘station square’, were greenlit.

West of England Developments (Taunton) Ltd, responsible for the forthcoming homes and roads, has assured that the site earmarked for the station will remain safeguarded from any future development should officials decide against it. The government’s commitment to rail investment was reinforced with assurances from Darren Jones, Chief Secretary to the Treasury and MP for Bristol North West, who expressed gratitude to Mr Amos for his persistent advocacy on the matter.

He stated: “I thank the honourable member for his campaigning and for welcoming today’s news of historic levels of investment into the west of England for transport.

“The best use of the money is to make sure that not only do we deliver infrastructure within our combined authorities, but that opportunities are unlocked for broader spending decisions on intercity transport, heavy rail, road investments, new housebuilding and industrial policy spending.

“The review of the Green Book has been looking at this and further details will be published next week. However, I am confident that we will be able to unlock opportunities for areas outside the combined authorities, and the investment announced today makes a stronger case for doing so.”

Mr Jones added that the government would publish its “infrastructure strategy” shortly after the spending review which would lay out how the government would address supply chain issues and other problems in delivering major transport projects.

A fascinating analysis by the BBC.

[This was written late last week just as Reform Chair, Zia Yusuf, announced his exit, 48 hours later he re-entered stage right. Par for the course in the leadership turmoils of Reform. – Owl]

Joshua Nevett www.bbc.co.uk 

Reform UK’s success in the recent local elections has propelled many councillors with limited or no political experience into council chambers across England.

While Reform UK’s rise was the big story of those elections, almost half of the councils up for grabs were not won outright by any single party.

That means many of those newbie councillors are now navigating so-called hung councils, where parties with little in common often work together to get the business of local government done.

But so far, it hasn’t panned out that way for Reform UK, which isn’t involved in any formal coalitions, pacts or deals in areas where there were local elections this year.

This was despite rampant speculation about Reform-Conservative coalitions ahead of the polls, with party leaders Kemi Badenoch and Nigel Farage not ruling out council deals.

So, what’s going on?

In some places – Warwickshire, Worcestershire and Leicestershire – Reform UK has enough councillors to form minority administrations and is attempting to govern alone.

In other areas where coalitions were possible, Reform UK has either shunned co-operation or vice versa. Where Reform UK has explored potential partnerships locally, its policies have been viewed with suspicion by the established parties.

In Cornwall, the Liberal Democrats, Labour and the Conservatives refused to work with Reform UK, even though it was the biggest party and had won the most seats.

Instead, the Lib Dems teamed up with independent councillors to run Cornwall Council as a minority administration.

That infuriated Reform UK’s group leader in Cornwall, Rob Parsonage, who branded the coalition deal “undemocratic” and “a total stitch-up”.

Did other parties contrive to exclude Reform UK? The newly minted Lib Dem council leader, Leigh Frost, does not think so.

“The reality is our core values at heart of it just stand for two very different things and it makes working together incompatible,” Frost told the BBC.

“And then Reform was given two weeks to try to form an administration and chose not to.”

Frost said Reform UK’s Cornwall candidates mainly campaigned on immigration.

This was echoed in conversations with other local party leaders across the country.

The BBC was told Reform’s candidates had little local policy to offer and mostly focused on national issues, such as stopping small boats crossing the English Channel.

[For the record two Reform councillors, out of 28, have not yet attended any meeting in Cornwall and another three have only attended half the number they were slated to attend – Owl]

Slashing “wasteful spending” by councils, like Elon Musk’s Department of Government Efficiency (Doge) in the US, was also a common campaign theme.

In Worcestershire, where Reform won the most seats but fell short of a majority, the party’s supposed lack of local policy was a major sticking point for the Conservatives.

“They haven’t got a local prospectus and that was part of the problem,” said Adam Kent, Tory group leader on Worcestershire County Council.

“They didn’t stand on any local issues. It was on national politics. How can you go into coalition with somebody if you don’t even know what they stand for?”

Joanne Monk, the Reform UK council leader in the county, said she only had “a brief couple of chats” with other party leaders but was uncompromising on coalitions.

“I’m damned sure we’re not on the same wavelength,” she said.

She followed the lead of Farage, who ruled out formal coalitions at council level but said “in the interests of local people we’ll do deals”, in comments ahead of the local elections.

In Worcestershire, Reform UK’s minority administration may need to do deals to pass key decisions and avoid other parties banding together to veto their plans.

Recognising this, she acknowledged other parties were “going to have to work with us at some point”.

In Northumberland, the Conservatives retained their position as the largest party and gave the impression they were willing to entertain coalition talks with Reform UK, which gained 23 seats.

“I said I would work with anyone and my door is open,” said Conservative council leader Glen Sanderson.

“But Reform the next day put out a press release saying the price for working with the Conservatives would be extremely high. So on that basis, I assumed that was the door closed on me.”

No talks were held and the Conservatives formed a minority administration.

Weeks had passed after the local elections before Mark Peart was voted in as Reform UK’s local group leader in the county. As a result, he wasn’t in a position to talk to anybody.

“Everything had already been agreed,” Peart said. “It was too late.”

Reform UK sources admitted the party was caught a bit flat-footed here and elsewhere as many of its new councillors got the grips with their new jobs in the weeks following the local elections.

A support network for those councillors, in the form of training sessions and a local branch system, is being developed by the party.

But this week Zia Yusuf, one of the key architects behind that professionalisation drive and the Doge cost-cutting initiative, resigned as party chairman, leaving a gap in the party’s leadership.

Reform UK’s deputy leader, Richard Tice, said the party’s success at the local elections “was partly because of the significant efforts and improvements to the infrastructure of the party” spearheaded by Yusuf.

Though Yusuf is gone, the party has considerably strengthened its foundations at local level, after gaining 677 new councillors and two mayors.

A Reform UK source said party bosses will be keeping an eye out for stand-out councillors who could go on to become parliamentary candidates before the general election.

They said in areas where Reform UK runs councils as a minority administration, it’s going to take some compromise with other parties and independents to pass budgets and key policies.

In the messy world of town halls and council chambers, that could be a tough apprenticeship.

Political opposition has an important role to play in all levels of democratic government but it needs to be conducted seriously, in a consistent and principled way, not through broadcasting hypocritical nonsense through social media. – Owl 

From Independent Cllr. Paul Hayward’s facebook post 7 June

Having now met with most of my fellow Councillors at DCC, and most of the newly and democratically elected Reform group, I am somewhat disappointed that their supporters and campaigners in East Devon insist on claiming that the new administration at DCC (of which I am not a part I must add) has acted in an undemocratic way by not appointing any Reform Councillors to the Cabinet. The words “disgraceful” have been bandied about by social media commentators and elected cllrs alike.

I can understand why they might be disgruntled, and upset, but that is politics, but it is certainly not undemocratic. For if it were, then they would leap at the chance to also criticise Leicestershire County Council where Reform won 45% of the seats on a 32% total vote share, and have formed a minority administration themselves, with 100% of all Cabinet seats being shared amongst their group – plus the Chair and Vice Chair.

Nothing unlawful or unusual about that – to the victor, the spoils etc – but it is a little bit hypocritical to then criticise another political group at another County Council with a similar cllr demographic and then also refuse to publish a comment making that observation in the interests of transparency and veracity.

I look forward to working with all my DC Cllr colleagues in the greater interests of helping everyone in Devon, and I also wish all Cabinet members the very best as they face the unenviable task of trying to unpick the financial maelstrom that is engulfing DCC, like so many larger authorities with adult and child care responsibilities and expenditure.

I would beseech local campaign teams to get involved in helping their elected councillors do the very best in their communities rather than putting out social media commentary that glaringly overlooks what their own party is doing elsewhere in the country.

Updated 1900 to include an example from the Reform Exmouth and Exeter East face book page.

Text reads:

NO MAJORITY. NO FAIRNESS.

On May 1st, no party won a majority… but the Liberal Democrats have chosen to fill Devon’s Cabinet entirely with their own councillors, bar one seat handed to the Greens!

Reform came a strong second in seat numbers. We’ve been given ZERO Cabinet roles.

For a party that champions proportional representation, this decision says it all.

Our 18 Reform councillors will now focus on Scrutiny Committees: holding the council to account, protecting taxpayers’ money and fighting for the people who elected us.

We are here to do the job you voted us in to do!

Council Leader Paul Arnott will write a letter to the secretary of state outlining the council’s fears about the bill, and will seek endorsement of it from other councils once it has been written.

East Devon council anger at Planning and Infrastructure Bill

Bradley Gerrard www.exmouthjournal.co.uk

Anger has emerged from a Devon council about aspects of a major bill that will impact how planning applications are decided.

The Planning and Infrastructure Bill could see fewer applications decided by councillors at planning committees, with more being decided by planning officers.

It could also give the government the power to set the size of a council’s planning committee, and require its members to undertake specified training.

Members of East Devon District Council’s cabinet expressed dismay at the bill, which has now passed three of the five stages in the House of Commons, before it heads to the House of Lords and, if approved there, it will then become law.

Cllr Todd Olive (Liberal Democrat, Rockbeare and Whimple), said the government’s own environmental watchdog had raised concerns.

The Office for Environmental Protection (OEP)’s chair, Dame Glenys Stacey, said the bill has “fewer protections for nature” than existing law, and that creating “new flexibility without sufficient legal safeguards could see environmental outcomes lessened over time”.

Cllr Olive is concerned about what any new law could mean for places like East Devon’s pebblebed heaths and the Exe estuary.

“I want to ask the leader to work with leaders of other planning authorities and write to the secretary of state [Angela Rayner MP] to set out our position on this appalling bill, but also to brief our MPs,” he said.

Cllr Paul Arnott (Liberal Democrat, Coly Valley), the leader of the council, agreed that writing a letter made sense, but suggested that it drafts one and then seeks supporting signatories, rather than trying to curate a letter in tandem with other councils.

Cllr Richard Jefferies (Liberal Democrat, Tale Vale), portfolio holder for environment (nature and climate) said he felt the bill was “cynical” in its approach that proposed contributions from developers to protect nature but to then take away other ecological protections.

“If there is no net gain, then it doesn’t seem sensible to me,” he said.

Fellow environment portfolio holder Cllr Geoff Jung (Liberal Democrat, Woodbury and Lympstone) said: “There are some very good proposals [in the bill] but some very disturbing proposals too.”

“One classic example is how it will treat habitat mitigation, as at the moment, here and in Teignbridge and Exeter, I think we do a good job as we are local and understand the area.

“But to take that way and give it to Natural England doesn’t make sense; we all know the issues more than these big quangos and taking this out of local peoples’ hands and putting into a national body does seem to be going in the wrong direction.”

Exmouth member Cllr Nick Hookway (Liberal Democrat, Exmouth Littleham) added that the bill was “extremely concerning” and would worry residents about the potential impact on the Exe Estuary.

Some members were irked by the notion that the bill would require councillors to undergo certain training, even though some is already provided by the council.

“The bill mentions training and that if it isn’t completed then a councillor can be prohibited from taking part in the planning committee,” said Cllr Paul Hayward (Independent, Axminster).

“But the MPs who issue these rules that they impose on councillors never seem to apply them to themselves… so if this does happen, then perhaps MPs should have to undertake mandatory training before passing acts of parliament that impact people.”

The cabinet agreed that Cllr Arnott would write a letter to the secretary of state outlining the council’s fears about the bill, and would seek endorsement of it from other councils once it had been written.

Across the 12 Reform-controlled councils, 33 meetings have been cancelled or postponed within the first nine weeks since the election.

Additionally, at least 21 Reform councillors have missed their first meetings, despite the majority of these only having had one meeting to attend in their first month.

[For comparison with Devon, four Reform councillors out of 18, that is 22% or nearly one quarter, have missed the first two meetings in Devon County Council. This looks significantly higher than the average of two councillors per Reform-led councils quoted above.] – Owl

Athena Stavrou  www.independent.co.uk 

Councils taken over by Reform UK have been left in a state of “paralysis” as dozens of key meetings are cancelled and newly elected councillors fail to show up.

Nigel Farage’s party won huge victories in May’s local council elections, gaining control of nine councils and minority control in a further three.

However, opposition councillors have claimed organisation and productivity have been a “shambles” since the election, with some claiming the Reform representatives “do not know what they’re doing”.

Across the 12 Reform-controlled councils, 33 meetings have been cancelled or postponed within the first nine weeks since the election.

Additionally, at least 21 Reform councillors have missed their first meetings, despite the majority of these only having had one meeting to attend in their first month.

The worst-affected councils are Kent and Nottinghamshire, where Reform holds 57 and 39 seats respectively.

In Kent, nine out of the 22 meetings – 40 per cent – scheduled have been cancelled since the election up to July 4. That compares to just 15 per cent in 2024.

These include legally required meetings such as the governance and audit committee, a crucial part of local government structures, ensuring accountability and transparency of the council’s finances.

Other meetings, such as the police and crime panel, were cancelled as membership of the committee was yet to be confirmed – something opposition councillors say suggests their Reform counterparts “are not ready or prepared” for their roles.

In Nottinghamshire, four of the 10 meetings scheduled had been cancelled in the first nine weeks.

These include the governance and ethics committee and the overview committee, which is responsible for scrutinising the operation of the chief executive’s department.

Opposition councillor in Kent, Rich Lehmann, said the cancellations were “shocking” and made him question whether Reform was capable of leading the council.

“Reform did better than anyone expected, and clearly better than they expected as well,” he told The Independent.

“There’s a general feeling among opposition councillors that a number of elected councillors are not ready or able to attend committee meetings that take place during the day.

“The fact they’ve not even named who is sitting on committees suggests they are having trouble filling committee places and that’s why they’re being cancelled.

“No one knows what’s going on. There’s a lot of confusion.”

Kent is the home of Reform UK’s first Elon Musk-style Department of Government Efficiency (Doge) unit, which has been set up to look at “wasteful spending” in councils.

The announcement on Sunday evening came as a surprise to many councillors, Mr Lehmann said, who claimed the move was a “barrage of distraction” from the “paralysis” the council is in.

It is understood that Reform UK councillors have chosen to cancel meetings with the intention of rescheduling them once they are more prepared. It is also understood that as the meetings were scheduled by the previous administration, they were not scheduled to the new Reform council’s timetable.

In Nottinghamshire, the opposition Conservative group said the cancellations had sparked “serious concerns about leadership, accountability, and the future of local service”.

“This is a shambolic start from Reform,” said Sam Smith, leader of the Conservatives.

“Scrapping every key meeting in their first full month in charge is not only reckless—it’s dangerous. This puts public services at risk and shows just how unprepared Reform really are.”

He added: “There’s no excuse for this. They should be in their offices, speaking to officers, and getting to grips with their jobs. Instead, the car park is empty, and the council is effectively leaderless. This is what happens when you elect people who had no plan and no idea what the job involved.”

While local councils are independent bodies responsible for their own decisions, it is understood that the government expects them to operate within the law and to hold meetings in order to deliver for residents.

Kent County Council said some meetings, such as planning committees, were scheduled on an ‘if required’ basis, and were cancelled because there were no applications requiring an immediate decision.

A spokesperson said: “Regarding the changes to the meeting calendar, a number of meetings were squeezed into June due to the election and induction period preventing them from being held in May as would be the case in a non-election year. Because there are no time-sensitive issues due at these June meetings, consideration is being given to deferring business to relevant July meetings to make best use of member and officer time.”

The Independent contacted Nottinghamshire Council’s new Reform leader Mick Barton for comment. He did not respond but told Local Democracy Reporters the comments are “political rhetoric from the opposition”.

He said: “That’s absolute nonsense. We’ve only been here three weeks. We’re still setting policies, we’re having weekly cabinet meetings with officers to find out what we’re going to be doing going forward.”

A massive cliff protection scheme is likely to go ahead this year after a council agreed to bring forward investment.

Miles Davis www.bbc.co.uk

Seaton Hole on the south coast has suffered repeated major landslips that have left beach users and coastal homes in danger.

East Devon District Council said 7,000 tonnes of rock must be delivered by sea to Seaton by September to be able to press ahead with the project before prices go up.

The council’s cabinet recommended an upfront investment of £673,500 this year to enable the £2.2m scheme to go ahead with a final decision due to be made by full council on 18 June.

The council said the decision was “critical to help reduce delays and cost increases”.

Geoff Jung, cabinet member for environment at East Devon District Council, said: “Approval from council will allow us to push ahead and order the new rock to ensure best value for money now, as delays may result in higher costs being incurred next year.”

The project included increasing the volume of existing rock armour at the base of the cliffs, upgrading the steel baskets used to hold rocks in place and maintaining the current seawall.

The total cost is expected to be £2.2m and has already been approved by the Environment Agency.

The council said it was confident planning permission would be granted, as no major issues were raised during the pre-application process.

The report said there was a “small risk”, external of not getting planning permission but “in the worst-case scenario” that would result in the council having rock armour for future schemes.

What about the Brixham crypto outbreak and all the sickness already reported this year in Budleigh?

Is it because of its “outstanding business plan”?

Or is it to ensure the retention of existing management talent and avoid any radical reset? – Owl

Caroline Voaden, Lib Dem MP for South Devon, said it was baffling why South West Water bosses had not had their bonuses banned. “It’s hard to think of a company more deserving to have its boss’s bonuses banned than South West Water,” she said. “Not only did the company preside over the cryptosporidium outbreak in the relevant financial year, but in June, just weeks after the outbreak, South West Water’s CEO saw her salary increased by £300,000, proving their absolute contempt for affected customers.” Source Guardian

Six firms under bonus ban

Under the beefed-up Water Act, six firms are banned from paying bonuses this year including Anglian Water, Southern Water, Thames Water, United Utilities, Wessex Water and Yorkshire Water.

The ban, which is backdated to April 2024, means regulator Ofwat can force firms to claw back bonuses that have been paid or face enforcement action. It applies to share awards as well as cash.

It is part of new measures in the Water Act which comes into force on Friday.

Environment Secretary Steve Reed said that water company bosses “should only get bonuses if they’ve performed well, certainly not if they’ve failed to tackle water pollution”.

Officials said the government would look into companies trying to get around the ban by raising executives’ base salaries.

But Liberal Democrat Environment spokesperson Tim Farron called the government’s announcement “half-baked”.

He added that it “doesn’t touch the sides in enacting fundamental reform – especially if water companies can still workaround bonuses and wriggle off the hook”. Source BBC

Government must follow Cunliffe recommendations and then go further to fix failing water system

Published by Wildlife and Countryside Link (Link), the largest environment and wildlife coalition in England, bringing together 89 organisations to use their strong joint voice for the protection of nature.

wcl.org.uk

Environment groups are calling for bold urgent action from the Government in response to the National Water Commission’s interim report released today.

The public are rightly outraged by the state of England’s waterways. The Independent Water Commission has exposed failings in water company governance and financial controls, shortcomings in political planning and prioritisation, and a lack of cross-sector coordination and accountability for environmental management.

Charities are calling on the Government to start work now on vital reforms that will cut pollution and restore nature. They highlight that creating a new Regional System Planner – as recommended by Cunliffe – will take time. To ensure all sectors responsible for water pollution can play their part and be held to account, the Government should commit now to setting up this new body.

In other areas, the interim report stops short of final recommendations. However, it clearly recognises that water companies need stricter controls to ensure they work in the public interest and cannot profit at the expense of the environment. The Government must introduce new regulations with robust public interest tests and ensure civil society and environmental voices are properly heard in decision-making.

Some steps can and must be taken immediately, while others require a bold Water Act to deliver long-term, legally enforceable reform. The group make the following recommendations:

Richard Benwell, CEO of Wildlife and Countryside Link, said:

 “This interim report is a clear signpost, not a finishing line. The public are rightly angry about pollution and regulatory failure, and nature is in crisis. The Government must start work now to put in place a Regional Systems Planner with powers to align planning and spending decisions to restore river catchments.

“Even where the Commission has yet to make final recommendations, the findings of failings suggest a clear direction of travel. Politicians must stop equivocating and set clear strategic direction for environmental recovery. Strong, enforceable targets are needed for water quality that can be applied across sectors. Where in the past polluters have got away with profiteering, public interest tests must be built into every layer of operations and governance with consequences for failure.”

Quick wins:

Wildlife and Countryside Link is calling for the immediate implementation of several key proposals:

Mark Lloyd, CEO of The Rivers Trust, said: “Water is fundamental for nature’s recovery, for the growth of the economy, for the health and security of communities and for life itself. We will press the Commission over the next month to shoot for the stars rather than the moon in its final report. We will then expect to see the Government move swiftly and boldly to realise this high level of ambition.”

James Wallace, CEO of River Action, said:

 “We only have one chance to get it right. The public mandate for change is overwhelming and so is the urgency. What comes next must be decisive, enforceable, and in the public interest. We urge Sir Jon Cunliffe to give us more, much more. Nothing short of a systemic overhaul of how water companies are owned, funded, operated and regulated will do.”

Ali Morse, Water Policy Manager at The Wildlife Trusts said:

 “The Commission’s interim report emerges at a time when environmental protections are under threat from proposed planning laws, and budgets for nature look set to be slashed. This doesn’t look like the actions of a Government that is serious about restoring our chalk streams, or averting the extinction of water vole and Atlantic Salmon. To convince us otherwise, we need to see Government responding with measures that ensure water companies prioritise the health of rivers and seas, that past harms are made good, that other sectors too play their role, and that environmental regulators are equipped and supported to do their jobs. Only this will ensure that we have a healthy, thriving water environment that society and nature can both benefit from.”

Giles Bristow, CEO of Surfers Against Sewage, said:

“Ending the pollution crisis in our wild waters was an election issue acknowledged on the steps of Downing Street by the Prime Minister Keir Starmer. This report clearly identifies a broken privatised water system but stops short on systemic solutions to fix it. Until it is replumbed to prioritise the public health and the environment over profit for investors, an angry public will continue to swim and surf in a deluge of sewage that is destroying our rivers, lakes and coastal waters. We need tougher recommendations to government in the final report to help fix this system for good!”

Read more in our evidence to the Water Commission here: Blueprint for Water response – Independent Water Commission Call for Evidence.

Restoring public confidence is the key aim of the Cunliffe Review. ( Interim report published earlier this week.) 

In launching it the government recognized that a fundamental reset of the water sector was needed to address the systemic issues, and pave the way for a more sustainable and reliable water system.

But does it look like we are getting this fundamental reset?

Feargal Sharkey doesn’t think so:

Cunliffe report won’t make one atom of the UK’s water any cleaner

Feargal Sharkey www.thetimes.com 

Before the election, during the election and after the election, the government promised us a complete root-and-branch review, a wide-ranging re-examination and a complete reset for the water industry. We were promised champagne but today we’ve been offered sour milk.

I actually have some empathy for Sir Jon Cunliffe, bearing in mind the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs is at the very epicentre of the utter shambles that is the modern water industry.

And yet it is the very government department that not only provides Cunliffe’s secretariat to his independent water commission but, more importantly, took that reset and turned it into an exercise of nothing more than shuffling furniture around, looking at regulation and investment.

He focuses on a whole bunch of things that are already within the gift of government to fix. For example, planning. London is running out of water and we haven’t built reservoirs in decades.

Well, as it turns out, [the former minister] Michael Gove almost fixed that problem seven years ago when he amended the planning legislation to make reservoirs part of the national infrastructure. So those decisions now go straight to the planning inspector.

When Cunliffe talks about priorities and ambition and the direction of travel from government and the regulators being confused, that needs statutory guidance. That is issued by government to Ofwat and the Environment Agency, setting out the government’s priorities. Steve Reed, the environment secretary, could fix all of that this afternoon by simply reissuing the guidance.

The idea of more regional planning is simply window dressing. This has been discussed for 35 years. There is nothing new.

I’m afraid in this case, Cunliffe has just been “Sir Humphrey-ed” — ie never establish a commission unless you already know the outcome.

None of this actually addresses the fundamental underlying issues within the industry. It’s a failed system of regulation.

I have said this to Cunliffe: none of what he’s talking about will actually make one atom of water, anywhere in this country, any cleaner. I was chatting to someone this morning who was in a car looking at Lake Windermere, which was turning green as we spoke.

I don’t think he’s taken on board anything anybody suggested. I have sympathy for him, however, because he’s been blatantly told by government to avoid the big issues. In Sir Jon’s words, and he is quoted as saying it, his job is to simply make the current system better. Well, when the current system is institutionally dysfunctional, institutionally discredited and institutionally incompetent, why bother?

When it comes to Cunliffe’s report, I had absolutely no expectations for it whatsoever. And he has not disappointed.

In terms of the big, ugly issue sitting at the middle of this, he’s been told not to get involved in it. That issue is a restructuring of the ownership of these companies.

There is nothing in Sir Jon Cunliffe’s report or the government’s current strategy that is going to stop Windermere from being poisoned, or save a single chalk stream in this country. We need to take a radical approach to this industry.