A “perfect storm” of Covid and staff shortages has left social care unable to take a surge of patients, it has been warned.

Rebecca Thomas www.independent.co.uk

Care home leaders said residential homes may not be able to handle the usual influx of patients from hospitals during the Easter bank holiday weekend as “chronic” shortages, which hit a high in March, force providers to close beds.

Recent data published by Skills for Care showed vacancy rates across care services hit 10 per cent in March 2022, compared to 5.9 per cent in 2021.

The figures, commissioned by the Department of Health and Social Care, represent the highest level recorded since the beginning of last year.

It comes as figures published on Thursday revealed A&E waits and ambulance delays in March were the worst they’ve ever been.

More than 390,000 people with potentially life-threatening conditions, including suspected strokes, waited more than an hour for an ambulance.

One in 10 patients waited more than two hours for an ambulance which should come within 18 minutes.

According to a letter, reported by The Health Service Journal, hospital trusts were warned of escalating pressures in the northwest and were told 1,700 care home beds locally had been closed due to staffing and Covid pressures.

In an interview with The Independent, Martin Green, chief executive for Care England, said his members were reporting “chronic staff shortages” made worse by more workers testing positive for Omicron in rent weeks.

He said care homes have not been able to deal with the influx of patients from hospitals which usually occurs ahead of a bank holiday.

Mr Green explained: “Hospitals make a decision to empty themselves, whether it be the bank holidays, Christmas, and that at a time when it’s also difficult for us to maintain staffing levels.

“Occupancy levels are much, much lower than they would be normally – they’re hovering around about 88 to 90 per cent but would normally be in the high 90s, which has had an impact on the viability of homes. Some not only reduced the number of beds that they’re opening, because of issues around Omicron because they cannot get the staff.”

He said one care home in Buckinghamshire recently had to reduce its capacity by 10 beds due to staffing problems.

In addition to staff absences, the Care England chief said current legislation is forcing homes to implement certain infection control measures which are leading to less beds and is costing homes up to £1m.

Councillor Louise Gittins said in an interview with The Independent that social care was already suffering from “massive” staffing shortages as recruitment was becoming more difficult, with one provider losing 100 staff since December.

She said the bank holiday will worsen these pressures, adding: “What will happen with the bank holiday, it will put pressures on things such as pharmacies not necessarily being open and where people aren’t about because of the bank holiday.

“It feels like the perfect storm at the moment. We’ve got high Covid rates, which is putting pressures on staff, in terms of absences.”

Responding to the NHS performance figures on Thursday, Chris Hopson, chief executive for NHS Providers, said hospitals were dealing with the “most sustained difficult and pressured period of time they can remember”.

He said: “We need to be honest about the four long-term fault lines which have built up over the last decade, exacerbated by Covid. Between 2010 and 2020, the NHS went through the longest and deepest financial squeeze in its history.

“It was therefore unable to grow capacity to match growing demand, leaving a significant capacity shortfall.

“Huge workforce shortages have built up, with 110,000 vacancies and only 27 per cent of staff saying their organisation has sufficient staff to do their job properly. And the government has consistently failed to solve problems in social care.

“Until these fault lines are properly addressed, the NHS is going to remain under real pressure.”

Levelling Up Secretary set to axe rules forcing developers to build “affordable” homes, in favour of a new levy for councils.

Where would this leave the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL)? – Owl

By Ben Gartside www.telegraph.co.uk 

Michael Gove is poised to hit property developers with a £7bn levy that could pave the way for a massive expansion of new council housing.

The Levelling Up Secretary is preparing to axe rules which force companies to build a set number of “affordable” homes on their developments themselves, and will order them to pay into an infrastructure fund instead that can be used by councils for their own projects.

Mr Gove has held talks with industry about the proposals, and executives are preparing for them to be included in the Queen’s Speech next month if approved by Cabinet.

A formal consultation could be launched within weeks.

Developers expect the new levy to raise around £7bn if it goes ahead, assuming it costs the same as they spend under existing affordable housing rules.

It is not clear if councils will be able to use the money however they see fit, or if they will be required to earmark it for projects such as homes, roads, schools and GP surgeries.

However, large amounts of money are likely to be funnelled into local authority schemes to tackle the housing crisis. This could include an increase in the building of homes owned by councils, industry insiders said, or sold to residents through council-run developers known as Housing Delivery Vehicles.

The proposals have been met with consternation from developers. One executive said that while the move is designed to simplify planning, it may have the opposite effect. 

They said: “While the current system can be arduous and there have been complaints around efficiency, it ensures infrastructure is built and doesn’t create issues about cash flow, and means infrastructure can be built in advance of a development. 

“It also means communities neighbouring the development won’t necessarily feel a direct benefit – there is no obligation for councils to create infrastructure, or for it to be built in the same area.”

The proposals involve axing Section 106 of the 1990 Planning Act, which allows councils to order developers to build infrastructure in return for permission to start work on new estates.

This typically includes a requirement for a certain number of affordable homes, which can be run by social housing groups, sold through a shared ownership scheme or simply offered for sale or rent at a below-market rate.

The National Planning Policy Framework states that 10pc of homes should be affordable on major developments, and 52,100 such properties were built in 2020-21.

Section 106 has long been criticised as an unwieldy and bureaucratic imposition on developers that holds up projects.

Mr Gove is now proposing to scrap it and replace the system with a “consolidated infrastructure levy”, which would charge developers a fee set as a proportion of the value of their housing project. This money would then be spent by councils themselves.

Council housing boomed in the postwar years before a massive sell-off driven by Margaret Thatcher’s right to buy policy.

Only 3,370 local authority properties were built in the UK in 2019-20, down from almost 195,00 in 1969-70.

However, there are signs of a renaissance with new projects started by London councils reaching a four-decade high last year.

One property investor said that Mr Gove’s plan risks leading to a rise in “s——y quality” council housing. They added that the overall number of properties built is likely to be lower than under current rules because developers can move more quickly than the Government.

The idea for scrapping section 106 was initially touted by Mr Gove’s predecessor Robert Jenrick in 2020 as part of a white paper that was subsequently dropped. 

Conservative MPs have become increasingly frustrated with the delays around Section 106 agreements, and have encouraged Mr Gove to rework the policy. 

In a letter last year, leading property industry figures including the heads of the British Property Federation and the Home Builders’ Federation warned against introducing an infrastructure levy.

Jules Pipe, London’s deputy mayor for planning, also signed the letter in a move that suggests the proposals risk sparking a backlash from some local authorities which would rather force developers to bankroll specific projects themselves.

The letter, written to Mr Gove at the time of his appointment to Housing Secretary, asked him to improve the existing system rather than scrap it.

It said: “In our view the most effective approach to enabling the delivery of affordable housing, infrastructure and sustainable development, is to improve existing approaches to securing contributions to meet policy requirements set by development plans.”

The Department for Levelling Up declined to comment.

Labour said that a fresh Partygate revelation on Sunday implied that Boris Johnson instigated one of the No 10 parties that he has denied attending.

[13 November 2020 is the date that Johnson’s chief adviser, Dominic Cummings, and communications director, Lee Cain, left their roles. Sources reported loud music and sounds of a party coming from the flat occupied by Johnson and his wife on this date – though Downing Street denies there was any rule-breaking.]

Andrew Sparrow www.theguardian.com 

The deputy Labour leader, Angela Rayner, spoke out after the Sunday Times reported that a gathering that took place in Downing Street on Friday 13 November 2020 took on the nature of a leaving party only after Johnson arrived and started pouring drinks.

She said: “While the British public was making huge sacrifices, Boris Johnson was breaking the law.

“If the latest reports are true, it would mean that not only did the prime minister attend parties, but he had a hand in instigating at least one of them. He has deliberately misled the British people at every turn.

“The prime minister has demeaned his office. The British people deserve better. While Labour has a plan for tackling the cost of living crisis, Tory MPs are too busy defending the indefensible actions of Boris Johnson.”

The revelation will intensify demands for a Commons debate this week about whether Johnson lied to parliament when he told MPs repeatedly that parties did not take place at No 10 and that Covid rules were followed at all time.

The opposition parties have been discussing how best they could force a vote on this, and one possibility is tabling a motion saying Johnson has been in contempt of parliament.

Johnson has already said that he intends to correct the record when MPs return to the Commons on Tuesday after their Easter break. It will be his first appearance in the chamber since accepting a fine for breaking lockdown rules at a gathering in June 2020 to mark his own birthday, and he is expected to issue a fresh apology for what he claims was an inadvertent breach of the rules.

However, Johnson continues to insist that he never intentionally misled MPs in his many comments on Partygate in the Commons chamber. The ministerial code says intentionally misleading MPs – lying to them – is a resigning matter.

Johnson is facing three more fines over Partygate, one of which relates to an event he attended to mark the departure of Lee Cain, his communications director, in November 2020.

According to the Sunday Times, this did not feel like a leaving party until Johnson himself turned up. “He said he wanted to say a few words for Lee and started pouring drinks for people and drinking himself,” a source told the paper.

This account has been confirmed to the Guardian by a source familiar with what happened. Nobody had organised a leaving do in advance – although it was usual at the time for staff in the press office to drink on Friday evenings – but apparently when Johnson encouraged people to join in, staff felt obliged to.

The police are investigating this event and another gathering on the same day in the PM’s Downing Street flat, where his wife, Carrie Johnson, is alleged to have held a party to mark the departure of Cain and his ally Dominic Cummings, who had been Johnson’s chief adviser.

In December last year, the Labour MP Catherine West asked Johnson directly at PMQs if there was a party in Downing Street on 13 November. Johnson replied: “No, but I am sure that whatever happened, the guidance was followed and the rules were followed at all times.”

On Sunday, the Green party MP, Caroline Lucas, revealed that she had written to the Commons Speaker, Sir Lindsay Hoyle, asking if he would allow Johnson, and the chancellor, Rishi Sunak, to be held to account by MPs for misleading parliament. Sunak also received a fixed-penalty notice last week for attending the birthday party for the PM – inadvertently, he claims – despite having told MPs he did not attend any parties.

In her letter, Lucas said: “It is … appropriate that MPs have a way of scrutinising what’s happened, and for [Johnson and Sunak] potentially to be found in contempt of parliament.”

Lucas added that the matter could be referred to the standards committee or the privileges committee, or MPs could hold a vote on a motion saying Johnson was in contempt of parliament. “The last would be quickest and therefore potentially most appropriate,” she said.

The opposition parties, who have been discussing tactics before a potential vote, accept that Johnson would probably win because of the size of the Conservative majority. But they believe it would be embarrassing for Tory MPs to have to vote to exonerate him.

On Sunday, Jacob Rees-Mogg, the Brexit minister, told Radio 4’s The World This Weekend that he thought Johnson had spoken “in good faith” about Partygate.

Referring to the birthday party penalty, Rees-Mogg said: “Many people would think that they were in accordance with the rules, when they were meeting people they were with every day, who happened to wish them a happy birthday, because that was the day it was.

“I think that was a perfectly rational thing to believe. Now the police have decided otherwise and the police have an authority. But he wasn’t thinking something irrational or unreasonable, that that was within the rules.”

New findings in a CPRE research report show a 1000% increase in short-term lets nationally in 2015-21, with most in rural staycation hotspots – all while 176,000 families wait on social housing lists.

[Owl missed this in January]

www.cpre.org.uk  13th January

Our analysis of data on properties on Airbnb and similar sites shows that a massive 148,000 homes that could have otherwise – or in some cases, previously were – used as homes by local families are instead being put up on short-term and holiday lets.

And this massive jump in holiday lets, taking local homes off the market for young families and others, is set against the backdrop of the steep decline in the completion of much-needed new social housing projects since 2013.

Holiday honeypots

Our data shows startling figures in locations such as Cornwall, Devon, South Lakeland and Northumberland, and is often combined with social housing waiting lists that are lengthening year on year.

In fact, in many of these rural areas these waiting lists could be drastically reduced or even eliminated if the number of properties advertised for short term let were available for local families.

Instead, the analysis shows that in South Lakeland, for example, which saw a 1,231% increase in short term listings between 2016-20, roughly half the families in need of social housing could be accommodated in properties exclusively available for holiday rentals.

And in Cornwall, which saw short term listings grow 661% in the five years to September 2021, there are roughly 15,000 families on social housing waiting lists and the same number of properties being marketed as holiday let.

This is why we at CPRE want to see changes made to protect the housing needed by people in rural areas and to curb the runaway spread of shifting to pricey short-term lets.

As our chief executive, Crispin Truman, says:

‘There simply has to be a government response to the fact that our rural housing supply is disappearing into an unregulated short-term rentals market that simply didn’t exist six years ago.’

‘A problem that’s quickly getting out of hand’

We’re calling for tighter controls on second home ownership, including higher council tax on second homes and the requirement for short term lets to have planning permission.

Additionally, the definition of ‘affordable’ must be changed in national planning policy, with rents being tied to local incomes rather than market prices.

And time is of the essence. As Crispin puts it:

‘It’s clear the government needs to act fast to avert a growing housing crisis. With the cost of living set to hammer people’s finances in the coming year, this is a problem that’s quickly getting out of hand.’

We’re frustrated at rural people being left behind and need action soon. We want to see the government’s forthcoming Planning Bill seize the opportunity to level-up housing and make changes to law and policy to require at least one new genuinely affordable home for every market home built.

Crispin summarises the risk of leaving the rural housing crisis, worsened through short-term lets, unaddressed:

‘Across our most traditional rural communities, from the beaches of Cornwall to the lakes of Cumbria, homes that used to be rented to local families sit empty for much of the year. Hard-working people are suffering and they will not easily forgive a government that promised to level them up if it leaves them falling through the cracks of a broken system.’

Concerns over Tory election candidate’s drink driving conviction

Genevieve Riviere’s election campaign includes photos posing with Police and Crime Commissioner Alison Hernandez – who is the national lead for roads safety – Tory MP Johnny Mercer, Michael Gove and even the Chancellor Rishi Sunak.

Concerns have been raised about a would-be Plymouth city councillor who is campaigning about law and order despite being a convicted drink-driver currently banned from the roads. Conservative candidate for Stoke Genevieve Riviere’s election leaflets and associated social media posts feature her alongside police and crime commissioner (PCC) Alison Hernandez.

Just six months ago, Ms Riviere was handed a 17-month drink-driving ban, fined £230 and ordered to pay £85 costs and a £34 victim surcharge. She now wants to represent the Conservatives in the Stoke area of the city and is promoting her candidature by being seen alongside leading Tories.

Last week, Ms Riviere met the secretary of state for levelling up, communities and housing Michael Gove, which Stoke Ward Conservatives promoted as “Genevieve Riviere putting Stoke Ward on the radar of the Rt. Hon. Michael Gove.” In February, she was pictured with chancellor of the exchequer Rishi Sunak. And Plymouth Moor View MP Johnny Mercer appears with her in a photo at Smeaton’s Tower.

In her campaign leaflets, Ms Riviere describes how she believes in “combatting crime and anti-social behaviour,” and her Facebook page shows her meeting police and crime commissioner Alison Hernandez in the ward. Ms Hernandez is the PCC national lead for road safety, and also chair of the South West Road Safety Peninsular Partnership – a road safety coalition campaigning to eradicate road traffic deaths by 2040.

One local resident who does not want to be named said: “This is supposed to be people setting an example. How can [Ms Riviere] be seen out campaigning with a police and crime commissioner who is trying to improve road safety?”

Asked about her prominence in election publicity of a prospective Conservative councillor convicted of road safety offences, Ms Hernandez responded only about general issues around road safety.

In a statement, she wrote: “It’s a fact that many ordinary people who are normally law abiding fail to consider their driving behaviour when behind the wheel, from speeding to drink or drug driving. It’s one of our communities’ biggest concerns.”

She continued: “It’s why I’ve invested in roads policing to help identify and rectify the potential serious damage that people can do on our roads to others. From educating us on speed awareness training to more serious prosecutions of prison sentences.

“I know life can be stressful and people aren’t always thinking of others which is why we must do everything we can to help remind people of the consequences. Through the Vision Zero partnership collectively we want zero road deaths and serious injuries by 2040 and we still have a long way to go to achieve that. I’m thankful the police are out there doing their job on our roads and catching people to prevent a serious incident occurring.”

In January Ms Hernandez spoke about the police’s Christmas drink-driving campaign in which 200 arrests were made.

“Drink and drug driving is a choice people take which endangers lives and it is completely unacceptable,” she said.

Ahead of that campaign, she said: “Those found guilty of this crime face losing their licence and even going to prison, which could cost you your job and livelihood.”

Because Ms Riviere’s conviction did not result in a prison sentence of more than three months, she is eligible to stand as a councillor. The court hearing was covered by PlymouthLive in October last year here.

She is not the only Plymouth Tory who has faced recent drink-driving convictions. Cllr John Riley (Cons, Moor View) was banned from driving two years ago. Cllr Riley is cabinet member for governance, HR, IT and community safety; a role which has responsibility for crime and anti-social behaviour and the Safer Plymouth Community Safety Partnership.

Genevieve Riviere and the chairman of Plymouth, Sutton Devonport Conservatives were both contacted about this issue but said they had nothing to add to the statement by the police and crime commissioner.

Paul Arnott www.exmouthjournal.co.uk 

There can’t be many of us who haven’t felt the financial pinch at some point in our lives.

My own experience was in my 20s, when an over-optimistic project I was involved in collapsed, leaving me about £5,000 in debt.

I had not a penny in the bank account from working that wasn’t owed – either to pay that back, or to pay rent to a chiselling landlord in a flat without heating. Ah, the1980s! Not very yuppy or loadsamoney where I was.

I would never call it character-forming; it was just incredibly stressful on an hourly basis. And being twenty-something, I was too proud to ask for help. Therefore, a luxury meal sometimes would be a bowl of white rice with the addition of a squirt of tomato puree.

I would visit my girlfriend’s family home to witness Billy the Cat being hand-fed slices of prime ham from M&S while my tongue hung out like a hungry dog’s. And above all I remember saving 1p and 2p pieces until I had enough to buy a Mars Bar.

Before I start to sound like Monty Python’s Four Yorkshireman, I should add that life looked up eventually. But the symptoms of poverty which I then endured seem never to leave our nation, despite it being one of the world’s greatest economies.

Strictly speaking, what a district council can do about this is “discretionary”; dealing with poverty is not a core “mandatory” obligation. But we feel we cannot just pass by on the other side of the road, because everyone in East Devon can see the looming acceleration of a Cost of Living Crisis.

What on earth has happened? Well, some won’t like this, but it is now empirically proven that since the self-harm of leaving the EU, our economy has shrunk by 4% according to the Conservative government’s own Office for Budget Responsibility.

Then we have the effects of the pandemic. That was not self-harm like Brexit, but the way we are coming out of it is. The recent increase in National Insurance (basically, just another income tax) is cutting into the budgets of already challenged households.

Then there is another surprising jolt, the Russian crime against Ukraine. Food supply diminishes, prices go up.

In the last two weeks households, especially for those on pay-as-you-go energy tariffs (already paying higher per unit rates), the pain is already here. For the rest of people in poverty, it’s turn off the heating or be faced with an unaffordable increase in your direct debit in the coming months.

Meanwhile, mortgage interest rates are starting to creep up again. A 0.5% rise in total recently, but where will they stop?

At East Devon District Council, despairing of Messrs Sunak and Johnson, we have launched an Action on Poverty Fund. This is not about direct cash handouts; that is not our role and in any case we simply do not have the money to do that.

Instead, we have opened a scheme where those brilliant people already working in their communities to alleviate poverty can apply for funding between £500 and £5,000 to help them develop the work they are already doing further.

We’re hoping that these groups will be able to then do more to encourage those in hidden poverty to seek help, to advise on budgeting, to help access welfare benefits, improve physical and mental health and diet, and aid practical ways of reducing energy and water costs, as well as helping people find employment.

The link for applications is:

www.eastdevon.gov.uk/grants-and-funding/grants-available-from-us/east-devon-action-on-poverty-fund

In addition, our local Conservative MPs, Neil Parish for the Tiverton & Honiton constituency, and Simon Jupp for the East Devon constituency, may appreciate your feedback to encourage them to prioritise poverty in their work for the East Devon public at Westminster.

Local groups, we look forward to your applications, and thank you for everything you already do.

‘They supported him, why don’t they leave now? They’re the party of law and order.’

Ian Hislop was met with cheers on Have I Got News For You as he said that the “entire Tory party” should resign for defending Boris Johnson amid the partygate scandal.

Isobel Lewis www.independent.co.uk 

This week, the prime minister and chancellor Rishi were given fines for breaking lockdown to attend illegal parties at Downing Street.

Johnson is the first sitting prime minister ever found to have broken the law. Johnson’s wife Carrie was also fined.

Appearing on HIGNFY on Friday (15 April), Hislop pointed out that voters had previously been told it was too soon to call for Johnson’s resignation before the Sue Gray report was released, and now were being told it was “too late”.

“He thinks everyone has forgotten about it and that they don’t care anymore,” Hislop said, curling his lip as he added: “Maybe by the time we go out, the party will have come to its senses and he will have resigned.”

“We’ve got another six parties to go. All the attention’s on this one and everyone’s going, ‘Oh god, woke BBC lefties, can’t you get over it?’

“And I’m thinking, ‘Yeah woke BBC lefty Lord Wolfson, the Tory justice minister who’s just resigned. I mean, there’s a snowflake. Tory QC, member of the House of Lords, pathetic.’”

Justice minister Lord Wolfson quit the government in protest at the prime minister’s failure to resign over breaking the law, saying the “repeated rule-breaking and breaches of the criminal law” in Downing Street could not be allowed to be treated with “constitutional impunity”.

Hislop continued: “He’s resigned. Why hasn’t Boris? Why hasn’t Rishi? Why hasn’t Carrie? Are you allowed to resign as his wife?

‘And why hasn’t the entire Tory party resigned, all of them? They supported him, why don’t they leave now? They’re the party of law and order.”

While Johnson and Sunak have apologised and paid their fixed penalty notices, it is yet to be seen if they will resign.

[These quotes above come from about 4 mins into recording, but well worth watching the whole of the first 5 mins 45 secs – Owl]

“As usual, it’s all talk and no action from a government incapable of getting to grips with the problems blighting households across our country.”

Ashley Cowburn www.independent.co.uk 

The government has admitted that a special “taskforce” announced last autumn to tackle the supply chain crisis existed for just days – and may never have convened.

Established the day before Boris Johnson began conducting a major reshuffle, the cross-governmental group tasked with “fixing” supply issues was placed under the supervision of Michael Gove.

Reports at the time claimed that Mr Johnson had joked to Mr Gove – who was then Cabinet Office minister – that he “didn’t want to have to cancel Christmas again” as the National Economic Recovery Taskforce (Logistics) was set up.

But in response to a parliamentary question from Labour’s deputy leader Angela Rayner in March this year, Michael Ellis, the current Cabinet Office minister, was forced to admit that the taskforce, announced on 14 September 2021, no longer existed.

“When the prime minister’s cabinet committee structures were refreshed, gov.uk was updated in October 2021 and this no longer included the National Economic Taskforce (Logistics),” he said.

The minister insisted that logistics and supply chains remained “a priority” for the government, adding that they were “discussed regularly by ministers in a range of forums”.

The Cabinet Office later said work continues to enhance the resilence of supply chains, but now through a committee focused on domestic issues.

Responding to a separate question, Mr Ellis declined to comment on whether the logistics taskforce had met “at least once” before it was removed from the list of cabinet committees.

“It is a long-established precedent that information about the discussions that have taken place in cabinet and its committees and how often they have met is not shared publicly,” he said.

Ms Rayner told The Independent this amounted to evidence that the government was “unprepared for the problems facing our country, which will only make the cost of living crisis worse.

“They lurch from crisis to crisis,” she said. “Instead of serious solutions, all they’ve got is gimmicks and fake announcements to grab cheap headlines, with no real plan to solve the problem. The consequences are clear – travel chaos and spiralling prices for ordinary people.

“Now they’ve been caught creating a fake taskforce to hide the fact that they don’t have a plan to protect supply chains and ease the travel disruption Brits are experiencing.”

But a government spokesperson said: “These claims are incorrect. Logistics and supply chains are a priority for the government, and are discussed regularly by ministers in a range of forums. “We are committed to supporting people with the pressures of the cost of living and we have already provided over £22 billion of help in 2022-23.”

Andy Prendergast, national secretary of the GMB union, said: “The logistics crisis has had serious consequences across the economy – yet it gets no more than lip service from the government.

“You’d have thought after seeing the public plagued by empty shelves and haulage chaos, the taskforce would have taken serious steps to address the problems.”

He added: “As usual, it’s all talk and no action from a government incapable of getting to grips with the problems blighting households across our country.”

No exception this year as Burrington’s submitted further amendments to the 40 four-storey flats proposed on Winslade Park. These amendments are in the Documents file dated 11th April 2022 – see link below

21/2217/MRES | Reserved matters application pursuant to outline application 20/1001/MOUT seeking details of layout, appearance, scale and landscaping for a residential development of 40 apartments (Zone D) | Winslade Park Winslade Park Clyst St Mary (eastdevon.gov.uk)

Comment from Clyst St Mary Residents Association:

Burringtons have only slightly reduced the height of two blocks (by lowering their increased ground level plans) by 90cm for Block A and 45cm for Block B and moved Block B (1.8 metres)  and Block C (1.6 metres) further south away from some  tree roots, with a few other minimal differences that are also inconsequential for us all and so insignificant that they will make no difference to our previous objections. 

These amendments are so insignificant that they fail to address the concerns and objections on the detrimental issues of overlooking, privacy and intrusion on Clyst Valley Road residents’ existing 7-metre-high 2-storey homes by these proposed approx. 15-metre-high 4.5-storey apartment blocks.

The link below is the Agenda for the Parish Council meeting next Wednesday 20th April 2022 in the Church at 19.30 hrs for those wishing to speak about this application or just listen to their comments

Just five cabinet ministers are prepared to confirm publicly that they and their families do not benefit from the use of tax havens or non-dom status.

Anna Isaac www.independent.co.uk 

Ministers’ financial affairs have come under scrutiny after The Independent revealed that Rishi Sunak’s wife had used non-dom status to lower her UK tax burden and documents suggested the chancellor was listed as a beneficiary of trusts held in tax havens. Health secretary Sajid Javid revealed that he had held non-dom tax status before becoming a politician.

But, when questioned by The Independent, only five of the 22 members of Boris Johnson’s cabinet were willing to say that they did not have links to tax havens and that they had not used non-dom tax breaks.

Labour said ministers needed to be more transparent over their financial interests.

“We need to know what arrangements members of the cabinet have made for themselves. And if there were such arrangements, how were they justified, and how much tax was saved?” said Pat McFadden, shadow chief secretary to the Treasury.

“This is not a mechanism open to our constituents, who are facing the biggest squeeze on their incomes in decades, made worse by the chancellor’s decision to impose increases in income taxes this year.

“The very least the public has a right to is full information on how many Conservative ministers imposing these rises have had non-dom status, or used any other mechanisms, including tax havens, which reduce their tax liability in the UK.”

Non-dom status and tax havens are both entirely legal, but their use by ministers has been called into question at a time when the government has decided to impose the heaviest tax burden on British families since the 1940s.

Still, some cabinet ministers have decided to offer the public a greater degree of transparency. Business secretary Kwasi Kwarteng, defence secretary Ben Wallace, and transport secretary Grant Shapps, along with their immediate families, do not use tax havens to minimise their tax bills, sources close to them told The Independent.

Nor have they used non-dom status – a controversial system that has been in existence for hundreds of years and allows wealthy individuals to avoid paying UK tax on their overseas income.

Education secretary Nadim Zahawi and his wife do not currently use non-dom status, according to sources. However, it is unclear whether they have historically used or continue to use tax havens. Meanwhile, George Eustice, the environment secretary, said in a broadcast interview that he would never seek non-dom status.

Separately, a government spokesperson said: “All MPs and sitting peers are automatically deemed to be resident in the UK for tax purposes, by law. In line with the ministerial code, all ministers provide information about their tax affairs to the Cabinet Office and independent adviser on ministerial interests.”

Questions over the financial affairs of the UK’s most powerful politicians have arisen after The Independent revealed that Mr Sunak, the chancellor, had not made the beneficial tax status of his wife, Akshata Murty, public.

Last week, The Independent also reported allegations that Mr Sunak had been named in 2020 as a beneficiary of tax haven trusts set up to manage interests of Ms Murty’s family, something a spokesperson said the couple do not recognise. The same spokesperson did not respond when asked if Mr Sunak had separately set up his own trust in a tax haven.

In an attempt to draw a line under the controversy, Mr Sunak requested over the weekend that Lord Geidt, the prime minister’s independent adviser on ministerial interests, review all his declarations since entering government in 2018. No 10 said an inquiry would be carried out by Lord Geidt on Monday, but insisted Mr Johnson had “full confidence” in the chancellor.

Ministers are required to declare their spouses’ interests, as enshrined in the code they sign up to when they take office. The decision about whether or not this information is made public by being listed in the ministerial register of interests is less clear cut.

The rules allow for ministers to put their shareholdings and some other financial interests into a blind trust. This is the position adopted by the chancellor. However, there is no legal or technical definition of what constitutes a blind trust or its management.

Several serving cabinet members have built successful careers in the financial services industry, including Mr Sunak, who before entering politics worked at investment company Theleme Partners, which is registered in the Cayman Islands – a tax haven – and prior to that The Children’s Investment Fund Management, which is also registered there.

Some investment companies choose to base themselves in tax havens as it makes it easier to avoid so-called double taxation – the idea being that serving a suite of global investors is easier if each just pays one set of taxes in their own jurisdiction, as and when they get paid profits by an offshore investment fund.

There are other reasons, however, why funds or individuals choose to use tax havens. These can include the considerable tax benefits that come from using offshore trusts, such as avoiding inheritance or capital gains tax, as well as the significant secrecy granted by many tax haven jurisdictions.

Last Sunday, Mr Javid, also a former financial services professional, shared a statement confirming that he had held non-dom status, and that, prior to entering parliament in 2010, he had created an overseas trust, which is now dissolved. A spokesperson declined to say where this trust was based, but The Independent understands it was not in the Cayman Islands, where some of his other financial interests were based.

“It’s clear that Sajid Javid has serious questions to answer about his past tax status and how it was justified,” Labour’s Mr McFadden said.

While working as a banker, Mr Javid was linked to Dark Blue Investments, an employee benefit trust in which staff were paid share bonuses via trusts to avoid tax. The supreme court ruled that tax ought to be paid on these bonuses.

Experts have queried Mr Javid’s use of non-dom status, given that he was born in the UK and therefore would have had to declare that he did not intend to live in the country in the long term.

Jacob Rees-Mogg, Brexit opportunities minister, has listed his share in Somerset Capital Management Limited, an investment firm that has operations in the Cayman Islands, in the register of MPs’ interests.

A spokesperson for Alok Sharma could not be reached for comment.

From a Correspondent: 

Plant a Tree for the Queen’s Jubilee 

— v —

Profits are good if you destroy a Wood! 

The Queen’s Green Canopy is a unique tree planting initiative created to mark Her Majesty’s Platinum Jubilee in 2022, which invites people from across the United Kingdom to “Plant a Tree for the Jubilee.” It focuses on encouraging sustainable planting of trees to create a legacy in honour of The Queen’s leadership of the Nation, which will benefit future generations and assist our climate crisis. 

However, it isn’t surprising that Burrington Estates at Winslade Park, Clyst St Mary are not amongst the numerous listed corporate supporters of this environmental incentive that stretches throughout the length and breadth of the UK, because during recent weekends in March and continuing into the first two weeks of April 2022, incessant noise from bulldozers and accompanying chainsaws have drowned out the birdsong from the native species that have made their homes in the many diverse, individual  trees, copses and extensive hedgerows that have for many years enhanced this  Winslade Park area. 

These trees and hedgerows are alive at this time of year with countless common, native bird species, alongside rarer families of woodpeckers, jays, bullfinches, goldfinches, predatory hawks, buzzards and nocturnal varieties of owls  – but because tree felling, lopping, crowning and razing trees to the ground is not conducive to the nesting season, we have national environmental laws in place at this time of year to protect our wildlife against any decimation of trees and hedgerows. 

The Developers will, no doubt, defend themselves that all trees felled and hedgerows obliterated were either storm damaged, past their best or required considerable thinning, lopping, crowning or felling to improve their overall welfare! 

To safeguard and redeem their reputation, Developers will justify, vindicate and absolve themselves that the trees’ and hedgerows’ demise had nothing to do with the fact that they want to clear huge swathes of land for developmental purposes!  These trees and hedgerows were standing in the way and preventing economic progress (not to mention the Developers’ expected sizeable, personal profits from this development) – therefore, that must be the legitimate reason for the demise of so many mature species? 

This is all at a time when the Developers are awaiting a planning decision for their application (21/2217/MRES) for three apartment blocks containing 40 approximately 15 metre-high flats (equivalent to 4.5-storeys), an elevated access road and 74 parking spaces adjoining existing residents’ garden boundaries, that have caused such staggering anxieties in this rural village for those who will be overlooked from the higher levels of this incongruous development. 

Moreover, this is happening at the same time as East Devon District Council is advancing their policy-making within the new Draft East Devon Development Plan to 2040, where the Council’s Strategic Planning Committee has ‘lambasted’ Developers who destroy trees and woodland and the natural environment in pursuance of development! 

In the words of Queen Elizabeth II’s great-great grandmother – Queen Victoria –  

“We are not amused!” 

Last night the Home Office was not denying suggestions, first reported by ITV’s Anushka Asthana, that a ministerial direction has been put in place over the policy [migrant processing]. If true, this would mean that Patel has given the Home Office a formal instruction to proceed despite an objection raised by its permanent secretary. Senior civil servants seek ministerial directions in cases where they have concerns about the legality, propriety, feasibility or cost of a proposal. This is quite rare — the IfG counts 46 ministerial directions in the last decade — and would add more fuel to the fire. David Normington, a former Home Office perm sec, told Newsnight that the policy “is inhumane, it’s morally reprehensible, it’s probably unlawful and it may well be unworkable.”

Politico London Playbook

Levelling down, the national picture – Owl

A government fund designed to replace EU grants lost due to Brexit has been criticised as “nothing more than an outrage” that will leave English regions tens of millions of pounds worse off than when Britain was in the EU.

Josh Halliday www.theguardian.com 

The Conservative’s 2019 manifesto promised “at a minimum” to match the average EU subsidy of about £1.5bn a year to help the most deprived parts of the UK.

But details of the government’s Shared Prosperity Fund show that it will hand out only £2.6bn over the next three years and will not match the previous EU funding level of £1.5bn a year until 2025.

The settlement has been strongly criticised by thinktanks and political leaders including the Welsh government, which said it was due to lose out on more than £1bn in funding over the next three years.

The thinktank IPPR North said the government’s Shared Prosperity Fund was a 43% cut in real terms compared with the average annual EU grants of £1.5bn between 2014 and 2020.

Dan Jarvis, the South Yorkshire mayor, said his region was owed £900m in funding to match what it would have received if the UK had remained in the EU. However, it has received little more than £38m over a three-year period.

He said: “This announcement is nothing more than an outrage; a cynical Conservative con that utterly fails South Yorkshire and drives a coach and horses through the government’s levelling-up agenda.”

The Department for Levelling Up insisted that it was “delivering on the UK government’s commitment to match the average spending of EU structural funds” by matching the EU’s £1.5bn in 2025. It said areas would continue to receive EU funding until the end of 2024.

However, regional leaders and policy experts accused the government of using “smoke and mirrors” by counting old EU money over the next two years.

The Northern Powerhouse Partnership, which is chaired by the former Conservative chancellor George Osborne, said regions in the north of England would receive up to 37% less funding under the new government fund than they would from the EU.

In north-east England, one of the most deprived regions of the UK, this amounted to a difference of £71.3m over the next three years, it said.

Henri Murison, the director of the Northern Powerhouse Partnership, said: “We were promised that no nation would be worse off post-Brexit but, when you take out the smoke and mirrors, the data doesn’t lie.

“These funds helped young people find work, supported small businesses and backed vital medical research – cutting it will have catastrophic consequences for our economy.”

Neil O’Brien, a levelling up minister, took to Twitter on Thursday to defend the scheme, insisting that the government was “matching in real terms what each place got on average from the [2014-2020] programme”.

However, this includes a count of old EU money still being delivered to these areas. IPPR North said the government’s promise to match EU funding was “far from reality” in two out of the next three financial years.

It described the announcement as a “serious blow for levelling up” that would stifle ambitious long-term investment. Whereas EU grants were delivered over seven years, the Shared Prosperity Fund model is for only three years.

Michael Gove, the levelling up secretary, said: “The UK Shared Prosperity Fund will help to unleash the creativity and talent of communities that have for too long been overlooked and undervalued.”

An example of “Levelling down”. Read how Tories try to spin this as a success. – Owl

Richard Whitehouse www.cornwalllive.com 

Cornwall is set to get less than half the amount of money it was expected to get from the EU before Brexit. The Government has announced that Cornwall will get £132m from the Shared Prosperity Fund over the next three years, it had been expected that Cornwall would have got around £100m a year if we remained in the EU.

Cornwall Council had previously submitted a bid to the Government to get £700m over the next seven years to match the funding which would have been provided by the EU. In one report, the council said that it was “crucial” that Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly continued to receive that level of financial support.

The new funding announcement has been welcomed by the Conservative leaders at Cornwall Council and Cornwall’s Conservative MPs. However, other councillors have expressed concern about the reduction in funding and accused the Government of breaking promises.

Whilst the total funding from the Shared Prosperity Fund (SPF) will be less than that which could have been received from the EU, the Government has highlighted that Cornwall is also receiving funding from other sources as well, such as Town Deals and the Levelling Up Fund. However, critics have previously pointed out that those funding streams were available to all parts of the country whilst Cornwall’s EU funding had been awarded because it was recognised as being one of the poorest regions in the EU. Prime Minister Boris Johnson has previously stated that Cornwall would get at least the same level of funding it would have received if the UK remained in the EU.

Minister for Levelling Up Neil O’Brien said: “The UKSPF will allow local leaders and communities in Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly to directly tackle the issues affecting their local area, whether that’s access to more opportunities or high street regeneration. I look forward to working closely with local leaders in Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly to see the creative, ambitious choices that communities make as they level up and take charge of their destinies.”

North Cornwall MP Scott Mann, who on his Facebook page claimed the Government would “fully match EU funds”, said: “This investment is a huge win for North Cornwall and means that we have delivered on our manifesto commitments and funding promises made during the Brexit referendum. Residents will be able to see the impact of this funding on their communities in the coming years and I am proud to have been able to play a part in delivering it. I look forward to speaking with community groups and elected local leaders to see how best we all think this money can be invested.”

Cornwall Council leader Linda Taylor said: “The government has confirmed today that Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly will receive £132m from the £2.6bn UK Shared Prosperity Fund over the next three years [2022-2025]. We welcome this significant allocation as part of securing additional powers, and even more investment for Cornwall through an ambitious County Deal later this year.

“The Shared Prosperity Fund will enable the council to start delivering on the ambitions set out in the suite of housing, transport and sustainable growth plans that comprise Prosperous Cornwall 2050 agreed at council earlier this week.”

Steve Double, MP for St Austell and Newquay, said: “It is great news that the Government has today confirmed what it has said all along, that Cornwall will not lose out with its replacement for EU funding now Brexit has taken place. In fact Cornwall has by far the largest amount of SPF funding per head of anywhere in England, recognition that we remain at the forefront of the Government’s levelling up agenda.

“Crucially this funding will be much easier to administer and deliver than the unwieldy, poorly targeted and often unspent EU funding, and will be managed locally, by the people who know the area best. Excellent news for Cornwall and I look forward to seeing the funding programme develop so we can continue to deliver for our Duchy.”

Jayne Kirkham, leader of the Labour group at County Hall, said on her Facebook page: “Wondering if anyone else has noticed that £129.5m over three years isn’t the same as the £100 million per year we’ve lost by not being in the EU? In fact, it’s less than half.

“But ‘Scotland and Wales will receive the same in real terms as they used to under EU funding, and an index of need will be used to allocate to authorities and regions within Scotland and Wales’. I’m sure the Tories said that in the budget about Cornwall too. Are they trying to quintuple count the 2019 Towns fund again? Or claim we’ll be ‘running off’ the EU money from 2020 as far ahead as 2025? Yet again, they’ve come up short for Cornwall. Over £150 million short.”

Independent councillor and former leader of Cornwall Council Julian German said on Twitter: “So Kernow gets far less than promised: UK SPF £132m over next three years. Watch the Tories come up with their phoney soundbites. Who’s surprised? What a sad state our country is in.”

Independent councillor Tim Dwelly said: “When the Government pledged categorically to match Cornwall’s EU funding (£100m a year) some people fell for it. Others like me predicted it wouldn’t happen. We could see how little was earmarked in the budgets. Now Cornwall is to get just £129.5m over three years from the new Shared Prosperity Fund. Not £300m. Just 43% of what it should be. The equivalent of £43m a year not £100m. This, I’m sorry to say, is what many of us call levelling down. Making Cornwall poorer as a result of a direct Government decision.”

He added: “My role since the last council election has been to be shadow cabinet member for economy. I know a lot about these funds because when Cornwall Council was not Tory (much better times) I had the job overseeing funds like this. I was persistent on the need for Government to match EU investment in Cornwall. Those funds brought us countless improvements like fibre broadband, a university, airport and harbour and dual carriageway investment, innovation centres, business grants and support. The list is long.

“After the Tories took over Cornwall Council, aggressive MPs like Steve Double and council leader Linda Taylor were furious when I predicted Cornwall was about to be levelled down. They were wrong though and all that hot air they let out must be making them feel more than a little embarrassed today.”

…In December, the prime minister told a television news reporter that there had been “no breaches of the rules” in Downing Street, and that, “the guidelines were followed at all times”. This was said directly in response to Allegra Stratton saying the same thing, on camera but in private, and then being unable to prevent herself from laughing at the utter ridiculousness of it.

The news reporter, ITV’s Carl Dinnen, had the sense, back then, to follow up with another question. Was Johnson personally satisfied that the guidance had been followed at all times, that he had personally investigated the matter himself. “Did you investigate that yourself? Are you satisfied yourself?” he asked.

“I am satisfied, myself, that the guidelines were followed at all times,” came the answer, and with it the now-trademark smirk, which has come to be understood as Johnson’s mark of honest dishonesty. It’s the smirk that seeks to collude with the interlocutor, to acknowledge that all present must surely know he is lying….

(Extract from Independent article:)

Boris Johnson’s pals severely underestimate the intelligence of the British public and it shows

The Woodland Trust has successfully secured more than £2million to buy a ‘stunning’ East Devon site it wants to transform into a haven for rare wildlife.

East Devon Reporter eastdevonnews.co.uk 

Charity chiefs faced a race against time to hit their target to purchase the 134-acre plot near Lympstone.

They want to create an attraction set in a scenic rural valley close to the Exe Estuary that will be free for people to enjoy.

An appeal has raised a seven-figure sum in just a matter of weeks.

It was kick-started by a generous £750,000 grant from Biffa Award, a partnership with Lloyds Banking Group, and support from The John Swire 1989 Charitable Trust.

The charity – celebrating its 50th year – netted enough to buy the site, but still needs to secure £275,000 to manage its transformation into a ‘resilient and thriving wooded landscape’.

The charity says it will start consulting with neighbours and local people on plans to bring the vision into fruition ‘over the coming months’.

First trees being planted in the autumn.

The 134-acre East Devon sire is near to Lympstone and the Exe Estuary. Image: Woodland Trust

The Woodland Trust’s Paul Allen said:  “The site is a remarkable opportunity to contribute to nature recovery in Devon, creating, through tree planting and natural regeneration, a vibrant mosaic of woodland and wood pasture together with open grassland spaces.

“Its existing hedgerows, veteran trees, streams, copse and wooded valley provide a good basis for this unique woodland creation project.

“The proximity of it to nature reserves including the Pebblebed Heaths and the Exe Estuary adds to its significance. It will improve the ecological connectivity and resilience of the landscape, as we face the twin threats of the climate and nature crises. “

The trust has pledged to end the use of plastic tree shelters and use a range of techniques to introduce native trees and shrubs suited the characteristics of the local and wider area.

It will showcase the ‘multiple benefits’ of trees and woods for climate adaptation, nature recovery and resilience, natural flood management and carbon capture.

Mr Allen added: “With access for local people to a new green space a central part of the project and their involvement key to its success, this project will contribute to health and well-being at a time when this is sorely needed.

“The support from the public has been invaluable to this project. We couldn’t have got to this point without them, and we’d like to express our heartfelt thanks for their support us to secure this land for wildlife and people.”

Maybe East Devonians might want to write to their MP, Simon Jupp or Neil Parish, to give their views on what Rees-Mogg called “just fluff” and “fundamentally trivial”?

If so, here are their emails (please remember to include your postcode):

 neil.parish.mp@parliament.uk

 simon.jupp.mp@parliament.uk

Latest video, utterly brilliant.

No mention of reducing sewage discharges – Owl

The parent company of South West Water is promising to slash bills for customers this year even though it has been hit by rising costs thanks to the war in Ukraine.

William Telford www.business-live.co.uk

Exeter-headquartered Pennon Group Plc said there will be a bill cut for 2022/23, and that bills will be lower than they were 10 years ago.

In a trading statement to investors, Pennon said it was aware of the financial pressures customers were facing and was doing all it could to support them.

The company said: “We recognise the pressure that inflationary pricing increases may pose to our customers. Our broad range of affordability measures ensures we are able to support those in need of support, and we are pleased that for the coming year bills will continue to be lower than they were 10 years ago, driven by our continued focus on delivering improvements efficiently and effectively.”

In February, Pennon said the average South West Water bill for water and wastewater services will be lower in 2022/23 than last year. The average household bill will now be £472, a fall from £483 in 2021/22. Customers will also continue to benefit from the £50 Government Contribution, to cut household bills, for 2022/23.

The company said, in its statement to the London Stock Exchange, it will be posting out lower bills despite facing mounting inflation itself. It said that whilst long-term protection from increasing prices was provided through its inflation-linked revenues and growth in the capital value of the business, the group still expects costs to go up.

This is because 26% of Pennon’s regulated water businesses’ gross debt of £3.1bn is index linked, meaning a 1% increase in inflation results in an additional £8m of financing costs.

And wholesale power costs account for about 10% of Pennon’s regulated water businesses’ operating costs. Although Pennon is about 60% hedged for 2022/23 it still has about 40% exposure to wholesale market prices, which have increased significantly over recent weeks because of the current geopolitical situation, including the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

However, Pennon told investors it remains on track to deliver “resilient financial and operational performance” across the group in line with management expectations, despite this “challenging macro-economic environment”.

Meanwhile, the company also said there is unlikely to be a water shortage although it is looking at a new reservoir site in the South West. The statement said: “As we enter the summer period, our water resources remain in a robust position with reservoir storage at about 93%. We continue to look for strategic value enhancing opportunities in this area having recently procured a site for development in our region.”

Pennon said its recently approved merger with Bristol Water means integration between the two businesses is already under way and it is targeting synergies of about £20m per annum across the group by 2024/25.

In March the Competitions and Markets Authority (CMA) approved Pennon’s £425m takeover of Bristol Water after being satisfied separate price controls will be maintained.

Pennon said the integration is anticipated to be complete during the next 24 months and added: “Synergies of c£20m per annum by 2024/25 have been identified across the group through service improvements, driving supply chain efficiencies, creating common systems and processes, and sharing best practice. We expect the profile of these efficiencies to ramp up to deliver c£50m over K7 (2020-2025), with one-off, non-underlying integration costs of c£10m anticipated.

“Pennon will retain the valuable Bristol Water brand and will continue to deliver the existing PR19 business plans of both South West Water and Bristol Water. For PR24, the combined entity will deliver for all our regulated water customers in accordance with a single business plan, with separate price controls.”