122 signatories to letter in the Lancet

www.independent.co.uk 

Boris Johnson is facing calls to abandon plans to remove almost all remaining Covid restrictions as a coalition of over 100 scientists and doctors warn it is a “dangerous and unethical experiment”.

After Sajid Javid, the health secretary, admitted daily cases could exceed 100,000 in the summer as measures are lifted on 19 July, the experts stressed there are “grave risks” involved in what they described as an “illogical” policy.

The letter – published today in the medical journal The Lancet – claims ministers’ strategy amid surging cases of the Delta variant “provides fertile ground for the emergence of vaccine-resistant” variants.

The 122 signatories also warn that unmitigated transmission will “disproportionately” affect children and young people who have not been offered a vaccine, with high circulation of the virus leading to “significant educational disruption” — despite the scrapping of school bubbles.

It follows the prime minister’s announcement at a No 10 press conference on Monday that all rules on social distancing, including the requirement to wear masks, will be lifted in just under a fortnight if the 19 July date is rubber-stamped next week.

According to the latest government statistics, the UK recorded 32,548 new infections of the virus on Wednesday — the highest daily figure since January as England endured a third lockdown. Of the adult population, over 86 per cent have now received a first dose of a Covid-19 vaccine while over 64 per cent have had both jabs.

While the link between infection with Covid and death has been weakened, they letter adds, it has “not be broken, and infection can still cause substantial morbidity in both acute and long-term illnesses”.

The signatories include Sir David King, a former chief scientific adviser to government, Dr Chaand Nagpaul, the chair of the British Medical Association (BMA), alongside international experts and members of the Independent Sage group set up to shadow the government’s Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies.

“In light of these grave risks, and given that vaccination offers the prospect of quickly reaching the same goal of population immunity without incurring them, we consider any strategy that tolerates high level of infection to be both unethical and illogical,” the letter says.

“The UK government must reconsider its current strategy and take urgent steps to protect the public, including children. We believe the government is embarking on a dangerous and unethical experiment, and we call on it to pause plans to abandon mitigations on 19 July, 2021.”

It adds: “As the third wave of the pandemic takes hold across England, the UK government plans to further re-open the nation.

“Implicit in this decision is the acceptance that infections will surge, but that this does matter because ‘vaccines have broken the link between infections and mortality’. On July 19 2021 — branded Freedom Day — almost all restrictions are set to end. We believe this decision is dangerous and premature.”

Editor-in-chief of The Lancet, Dr Richard Horton, stressed there was “no scientific consensus” over the government’s plans to scrap legal Covid restrictions in just under a fortnight.

Instead, he said : “There is deep disagreement. Many scientists are sincerely concerned that with sub-optimal double-vaccination numbers and rapidly rising transmission rates, we are at a very dangerous moment in the pandemic.”

Dr Horton added: “Removing mandates on July 19 will not only accelerate virus transmission, with substantial increased levels of acute illness, hospitalisation, and long COVID, but also create the conditions for the emergence of new variants that could escape vaccine protection.

“The government plan is not, as some have characterised it, a reasonable gamble—it is an entirely unnecessary and self-inflicted hazard that will cause real harm to health.”

Dr Nagpaul said that while the link between hospitalisations and deaths had weekend due to the rollout of the vaccination programme, “it has not been broken”.

“We know that masks are effective in stopping the spread, so it is nonsensical and dangerous for the Government to abandon compulsory mask wearing in indoor public settings, such as public transport, on July 19th,” he said.

“It is vital that we continue with these targeted measures to prevent the spread of this deadly virus until we have enough of the population fully vaccinated with both doses. ”

The warning of a “dangerous experiment” was also echoed by experts involved in the People’s Covid Inquiry, who suggested on Wednesday that the decision to lift remaining restrictions would affect communities across the country unequally, according to The Guardian.

“We’re further widening the health inequalities we’ve seen play out in the last year,” said Dr Tolullah Oni, an epidemiologist at the University of Cambridge.”

A Department of Health and Social Care spokesperson said: “The success of the vaccine rollout is saving lives, having severely weakened the link between cases and hospitalisations.

“We have taken a cautious approach to proceeding with the roadmap, delaying Step 4 to allow for millions more vaccinations so every person most at risk is fully protected.

“Our approach after step 4 balances the need to protect both lives and livelihoods and we will only proceed on 19 July with our four tests having been met.”

After receiving my second vaccination in April, I contracted Covid a week ago. I’m now “living with the virus”, a phrase emblematic of the failure of UK public health. Just look at the relative death rates in China (population 1.4 billion), Vietnam (100 million), the United States (340 million) and the UK (68 million). When plotted on the same graph, you cannot see the death curves for those two Asian states because they are so low.

Anthony Costello is professor of global health and sustainable development at University College London www.theguardian.com 

Britain’s leaders and their advisers told us last year that we could not suppress the virus. China and Vietnam did, within six weeks. They told us these countries would inevitably face a huge second wave. They haven’t; just smaller outbreaks, suppressed with good public health practice implemented by people on the ground.

As we know, exploding cases in March 2020 forced the UK into a 13-week full national lockdown, with huge damage to livelihoods, the economy and mental health. None of the east Asian states had national lockdowns, only local ones. In 2020, China’s GDP grew by 2% and Vietnam’s by 2.9%, according to the World Bank, compared with the UK’s 9.9% contraction.

Last summer the UK government set up a privatised, call centre-based test-and-trace system divorced from our underfunded local public health and primary care teams – quite unlike anything done in successful east Asian states. It couldn’t possibly work, and it didn’t. The Treasury refused to give any financial support to poorer people to isolate – in case, as the then health secretary, Matt Hancock, told a Commons select committee, they “gamed the system”. So poor families gamed the test-and-trace system instead, to keep working and feed their families. The virus simply spread, without public health control, and was only suppressed by two more prolonged national lockdowns.

The vaccines arrived with a huge wave of nationalistic fervour. We are world leaders, crowed the prime minister. The first to jab. Yes, our GP network stepped in magnificently to roll out the vaccines, but local authorities and public health remained deprived of any financial support. Meanwhile, test and trace staggered on, a fortune spent on private consultants, test companies and cronies. The £37bn spent was equivalent to a decade’s funding for the whole UK public health programme.

So the third lockdown now ends in a staggered and collapsing roadmap. In February the chief scientific adviser, Patrick Vallance, was alone among advisers saying that find, test, trace and isolate was crucial when case rates fell to low levels. On 19 May, we saw only 1,517 cases a day. Yet no changes were made to our ineffective test-and-trace system – it remained outsourced, with the lowest rate of financial compensation for isolation in any OECD country. So another wave began.

On Monday the prime minister told us we would have 50,000 cases a day by his so-called “freedom day” on 19 July. A day later the health secretary, Sajid Javid, said we could hit 100,000 a day this summer. But it was OK, he told us. We can “live with the virus” because we are all vaccinated.

Well, all except children, and the poorest and most hesitant groups. Actually, only half Britain’s population (34 million) is fully protected with vaccines. Yes, admissions and deaths will go up, but the government can’t say by how much. The possibility of the virus becoming vaccine-resistant was not mentioned. Vaccine protection appears much less effective at stopping infection than it does at preventing serious illness or death. Talk of long Covid is seemingly taboo among ministers, even though the latest government figures show more than 2 million people have lived with symptoms for at least 12 weeks. A new study has found measurable thinning of the brain cortex areas covering taste and smell in these patients.

And the government seems to think it fine for 8.8 million children up to age 16 to become infected – even though the US, Europe and Israel have vaccinated more than 7 million children because the benefits clearly outweigh the risks. Our vaccine committee is still thinking about it. Meanwhile, even in English school classrooms, masks are no longer required.

And what of the global vaccine shortage? At last month’s G7 meeting in Cornwall, President Joe Biden urged fellow leaders to share the patent with all countries so they can manufacture the vaccine themselves. The UK, Germany and Canada said no. Although 95% of funds to develop vaccines came from the public purse, it appears that the shareholders of big pharma companies must be protected. So a million people must die every month to sustain free markets.

New variants will emerge, but those same multinationals can make new vaccines – no doubt with new patents. No new G7 money was committed to the Covax global distribution scheme. And with Indian supplies blocked, Nepal, Bangladesh and the whole of Africa have virtually no vaccines.

Under the new libertarian public health system, “living with the virus” means we must not compromise people’s freedom to do what they like. If you prefer to cough and sneeze in a crowded commuter train, so be it: there’ll be no legal restriction on that. If porters, nurses, doctors, care workers, bus drivers or factory workers become infected, and if some of them die, so be it.

Seemingly no one is accountable. Politicians say they follow the science. Advisers say ministers must make the decisions. An explosion of cases is imminent, the burden on the NHS could be severe, and the threat of new variants that can break through the present vaccine protection is real, as I know. Rather than a merry-go-round of birthday honours and George Crosses, we need a plan to deal with the rampant third wave – one that will keep us safe.

“We must be honest with ourselves that if we can’t reopen our society in the next few weeks, when we will be helped by the arrival of summer and by the school holidays, then we must ask ourselves: when will we be able to return to normal?” Boris Johnson.

Each week of delay until 23 August would reduce the peak of hospital admissions.

As pointed out by a correspondent:

If accepted, the MP for RDE Hospital would go from Ben Bradshaw to Simon Jupp … Oh dear!

From the Boundary Commission:

Consultation is currently open until Monday 2nd August 2021 – please make sure we receive your response by that date at the latest, or it will not be considered. 

The NHS in Devon is warning Covid-19 admissions are adding to “severe pressure” on services.

Edward Oldfield www.devonlive.com

It says patients with the virus are one of a series of factors meaning all parts of the health system are “extremely busy”.

It is urging people to only go to their local emergency department in immediately life-threatening cases.

A statement said on Wednesday: “The NHS in Devon is under severe pressure at present due to several factors, meaning GP surgeries, hospitals, community health services, mental health services and social care are all extremely busy.

“High numbers of emergency attendances, combined with the need for some health and care staff, or their children, to self-isolate and the impact of Covid-19 admissions are affecting services.”

The warning comes after the Royal Devon & Exeter Hospital revealed on Tuesday it had gone into OPEL 4 status – its highest alert level – due to high demand and staff shortages.

The NHS Foundation Trust said that it was experiencing severe pressure across a range of services and both its acute and community hospitals.

In Plymouth, chief nurse Lenny Byrne urged people to book a vaccination as cases rose and there was “small but slowly rising number” of patients with Covid in Derriford Hospital.

Cases have been rising across the country, with the latest figures for Plymouth on Wednesday showing the highest number since January in the previous week.

During the week June 26 to July 2, there were 454 new cases confirmed in Plymouth, an increase on the previous week total of 218.

That is a rate of 173.2 per 100,000 people, below the current rate for England of 249.6 per 100,000 people.

In Devon, the 1,091 new cases meant a rate of 136 per 100,000, and in Torbay there were 296 new cases with a rate of just over 217.

Although cases are rising, the Government says vaccination has broken the link between cases, hospitalisations and deaths.

The latest figures for Covid-related deaths released on Tuesday showed none in Devon in the past three weeks. In the previous five weeks, there were only two Covid-related deaths in Devon and Cornwall.

Dr Shelagh McCormick of the NHS Devon Clinical Commissioning Group said: “The pandemic is not over yet and we need local people to choose the right service for their needs.

“Where it is not urgent, you can help NHS staff, who are under extreme pressure at the moment, by waiting for the right service.

“You can also continue to support the NHS by continuing to follow the Hands, Face, Space, Fresh Air advice.

“Maintaining high standards of hygiene and continuing with social distancing also helps combat the spread of other infectious illnesses like noroviruses which are circulating in the community.”

The statement said that although the number of people in hospital with Covid was relatively low, hospitals were extremely busy.

It said the reasons include:

• many staff are having to isolate and not come into work;
• some staff are having to stay at home to look after children who have been sent home to isolate;
• as care homes are experiencing the same problems affecting their staff, it can make it harder for hospitals to discharge patients into nursing and care homes;
• measures to keep people safe – infection prevention and control measures – mean we have reduced capacity in many areas. This means we can’t help as many people as we normally can so waits are longer and we can fit fewer people in our buildings;
• sustained high numbers of emergency attendances – including record attendances and higher than average ambulance arrivals;
• caring for Covid patients – although numbers are currently small, teams still have to manage with a reduced number of beds due to infection control measures;
• Some people are coming to ED when they shouldn’t be – other services are available to help them.

NHS Devon issued the following advice to people seeking help

Here’s what you can do to help – choose the right service for your needs, and if it’s not urgent, please be patient and wait to be seen in the right place.

Before contacting your GP, you can look up your symptoms online using the NHS App, the NHS website or 111 online and there may be steps you can take to help yourself before needing to contact a healthcare professional. Parents can download the Handiapp for information on childhood illnesses

You can also continue to support the NHS by seeking help when you need it from the most appropriate service. There are a range of options to get help in addition to your GP surgery:

Pharmacy: As lockdown eases, don’t forget your local pharmacist can provide health advice and help with minor illnesses like colds, rashes, sunburn, hay fever and diarrhoea. You don’t need an appointment and they can even provide you with the right medicines at the same time.

Mental Health: If you, or someone you know, is struggling with their mental wellbeing, our 24/7 mental health lines are available:

Devon and Torbay – 0808 196 8708

Plymouth – 0800 923 9323

111 First: Our NHS 111 service is available 24/7 to provide advice, treatment and care. Just ring 111 or visit 111.nhs.uk and the service will provide advice and refer you to another service if you need it. If you need to be seen in person, they can book you a time slot.

Minor injury units: Emergency Departments are for life-threatening emergencies. There is a network of minor injury units in Devon who can provide the treatment you need – often they’ll see you quicker, and closer to home.

By-elections for the East Devon District Council wards of Feniton and Honiton St Michael’s are taking place on Thursday July 8. Polling stations will be open from 7am to 10pm.

Candidates for Feniton can be found here

Candidates for Honiton St Michael’s can be found here

“We must learn to live with the virus” – Boris Johnson

“We are seeing rising hospital admissions and we must reconcile ourselves, sadly, to more deaths from Covid.”

“We have to balance the risks. The risks of the disease which the vaccines have reduced but very far from eliminated and the risks of continuing with legally-enforced restrictions that inevitably take their toll on people’s lives and livelihoods, on people’s health and mental health.”

“We must be honest with ourselves that if we can’t reopen our society in the next few weeks, when we will be helped by the arrival of summer and by the school holidays, then we must ask ourselves: when will we be able to return to normal?”

And who was it that delayed adding India to the Red quarantine list at the end of April, which has left us in a worse condition than otherwise could have been the case (cases doubling every seven days – work it out)? – Owl

The Royal Devon & Exeter Hospital (RD&E) has gone into OPEL 4 status – its highest alert level – due to high demand and staff shortages.

Howard Lloyd www.devonlive.com

The NHS Foundation Trust revealed today that it was ‘experiencing severe pressure’ across a range of services and both its acute and community hospitals.

Patients are being urged to phone 111 if they need urgent care instead of coming to the emergency department for treatment.

The hospital added that it was not the only one in Devon experiencing extreme pressures.

Phil Luke, director of operations, said: “The RD&E – and the wider NHS across Devon – is extremely busy today.

“As always, our top priority is to continue delivering safe, quality care. To help us ensure this, I am asking people who do not need emergency care to phone NHS 111 in the first instance. This will help to ease the burden on our overstretched services at this time. It is important to stress, though, that if you do need emergency care, please phone 999 or attend our emergency department.”

“In addition, if people have a loved one who is medically well and able to leave hospital please support us to ensure that they can do so safely.”

The Trust continues to operate its maternity services as normal.

A statement on the RD&E website added: The Trust is currently at OPEL 4 status – the highest alert level – due to:

• A large number of people continuing to visit our Emergency Department
• Delays with discharging patients who have no onward care arrangements in place
• A high level of staff absence due to COVID-19 self-isolation
• Caring for a small number of patients with COVID-19 and the impact this has on our other service
• Pressures across our paediatric services

Several other NHS organisations across Devon are also experiencing severe pressures. The RD&E is working with these organisations to reduce pressures, focusing on ensuring people are cared for in the most appropriate setting.

• Our Emergency Department, which is for urgent and immediately life-threatening cases only, is extremely busy today with longer waits than usual.
• If people need urgent care, before coming to our Emergency Department, we ask that they call 111 or visit 111 online first. Through 111, they’ll be able to speak to a clinician, who will advise where to go to get the right treatment more quickly.
• It’s really important that people continue to attend appointments and seek medical attention if they need it.
• If a friend, family member, or loved one is medically fit and able to leave hospital sooner, we ask that people get in touch with our Family Liaison Service to help us make discharge arrangements. The service is open 7 days a week, 9am-5pm, and can be reached on T: 01392 402093 (weekdays only) or E: rde-tr.pals@nhs.net (7 days a week). If you cannot get through on phone please email and we will ensure this is picked up.
• The free paediatric HANDiApp provides expert advice for common childhood illnesses.

Ministers decided to ditch mandatory face masks after being warned the UK economy would lose billions of pounds if people were made to wear them after 19 July.

By Jane Merrick, Richard Vaughan inews.co.uk 

Modelling from reviews of social distancing and mass gatherings revealed public dislike for wearing face coverings at sporting, music and arts events.

Keeping compulsory face masks could cost the events and hospitality industries more than £4bn in lost revenues, the analysis suggested.

A Whitehall source told i that the research was compelling and the driving force behind the decision to scrap mandatory face masks when all restrictions are lifted in England.

This was despite warnings by scientists from The Scientific Advisory Group for Emergencies (Sage) that the Government should keep “baseline measures” in place.

It suggests that ministers are now “following the economy” rather than the science as the country grapples with an exit wave from the pandemic.

The public dislike for face masks in recreational settings such as football matches and live concerts is in contrast to broad support for coverings on public transport, which is regarded as a necessary inconvenience, sources said.

But at a meeting in April, Sage recommended that face masks and other baseline measures such as working from home should be kept in place even after all other restrictions were lifted at the end of the roadmap.

The minutes, published on Monday, said: “Ongoing baseline measures and sustained long-term behavioural change will be required to control a resurgence in infections. Lifting restrictions may recreate conditions for super spreader events.”

The public health chief of one of the areas worst-hit by the Delta variant has added his voice to the widespread calls from scientists and medical experts to keep face masks in enclosed public spaces after 19 July.

Professor Dominic Harrison, director of public health for Blackburn-with-Darwen in Lancashire which bore the brunt of rising Delta cases in May and June, also called for a decision to be made as soon as possible on vaccinating 12 to 17-year-olds to limit transmission in secondary schools once the new term starts in September.

The independent vaccines committee the JCVI is still debating whether to extend jabs to 12-17-year-olds.

Prof Harrison told i: “I generally share the view of some colleagues that it is time for us to open up as much as possible – but the three things we need to make this safer are; to get on with vaccination for those aged 12-plus as soon as possible, increase ventilation measures in schools and other public indoor space and retain mask wearing (as now) in enclosed public space.

“With these mitigations we should be able to have maximum freedoms and minimal risk – but we need to be really clear – we will still not be completely risk free.”

Professor Chris Whitty, England’s chief medical officer, and the Government’s chief scientific adviser Sir Patrick Vallance effectively backed Boris Johnson’s decision to scrap face masks by appearing alongside the Prime Minister in Monday’s press conference.

But both scientists wanted to make it clear they would continue to wear coverings in enclosed or crowded public places, reflecting concerns on Sage that people should be mindful of the infection risk.

Professor Calum Semple, a member of Sage, said this was the right approach from the Government’s top scientists.

He told Times Radio Breakfast: “The emphasis from the chief medical officer and the Government chief scientific adviser was to assess your environment.

“They both said they’re going to be wearing masks in many circumstances, as will I.”

Boris Johnson’s “freedom day” will be a day of fear for elderly and vulnerable people and those with compromised or suppressed immune systems, for whom the efficacy of vaccines is much reduced, charities have warned.

Amelia Hill www.theguardian.com

Citing the statement by the new health secretary, Sajid Javid, that Covid infections could surge to a record 100,000 a day in a few weeks after all social distancing and mask-wearing regulations are removed in England, Blood Cancer UK has said that 19 July “will be the day that it feels like freedoms are being taken away from” many people.

“People with blood cancer are unlikely to have got as much protection from the vaccines as people without cancer,” the charity said in a tweet. “Lots of you have also told us it’s been great to start getting back to normal over the last couple of months.

“The reason many of you have felt able to do this is that the people around you have been keeping their distance and wearing masks. We’re appealing to the public to continue to be considerate because there’s no way of knowing if the person next to you is immunocompromised.”

Jan Shortt, the general secretary of the National Pensioners’ Convention, said that the 50 deaths a day being projected by many health experts as a direct result of the ending of restrictions were likely to be among the UK’s oldest and most vulnerable.

“The ‘free-for-all’ depicted in the information from government sources is making older people (and potentially others in society) anxious about going out into crowds and being targeted because they are either wearing a mask or not,” she said.

But it is not only older people who are scared and angry. Eve, who is 34 and unable to work because of disabilities, said the relaxation of the rules will “mean I’m rendered housebound by those who choose not to wear masks”.

“The so-called freedom day is, for us, the exact opposite,” she said. “Shame on those who made this decision and those who choose, going forward, not to wear a mask. You are part of why I will not be able to go outside, just as I was starting to enjoy a bit of actual freedom again – which, for me, has been that I now sometimes go into a shop. That’s all I’ve had. And now it is being taken away. I feel hopeless.”

Cathy Bass, a 39-year-old office worker in Lincolnshire, said the younger generation felt they had been sold out by the government’s decision.

“As a younger person who’s only recently had a first dose of the vaccine, I feel a bit betrayed by the decision,” she said. “We’ve sacrificed so much during the pandemic mostly for the sake of protecting the older population, yet apparently we can’t keep the small step of wearing a mask in certain places for just three more months while we wait for all of the adult population to have had the chance to be fully vaccinated and to be as safe as it’s possible to be from coronavirus, including the effects of Long Covid.

“Not to mention keeping unvaccinated under-18s safe – and helping stop the development of new variants,” she added.

Ellie from Leigh in Greater Manchester is 38 and lives with her partner, both of whom are classed as clinically extremely vulnerable.

“My partner and I have had our lives on hold for the past 18 months,” she said. “We’re just at the point where we can start to get out a little more and start mixing with friends and family. The idea that masks will no longer be mandatory terrifies me. I feel that as a disabled and vulnerable woman I’ll be excluded more and more from being able to participate in normal life.

“If people will not be wearing masks then I don’t want to return to supermarket shopping with my carer, to going out for lunch with my mum or attending events where lots of people will be present,” she added.

Jacquie Rogers, a 64-year-old author from Malvern said the relaxation in the rules will “condemn” her to having to avoid all places where others congregate.

The author, who is immunosuppressed and has been shielding since the start of the pandemic, said she “relies on others to protect me”.

“Emerging data from John Hopkins and other research centres suggest the efficacy of the vaccine is very low for people like me compared with others of my age,” she said. “I suspect my options outdoors will contract, too, with restrictions lifting, meaning even fewer opportunity for me to socialise or even shop.”

The chief obstacle, which is also widely acknowledged in policy circles, is that there is no real desire for property prices to fall as housing investment has a direct bearing on GDP, economic growth and confidence in the economy. The paradox is that millions of individuals and families under the age of 45 may be excluded from the housing market, but millions of older voters inclined to vote Conservative stand to gain from an ever-appreciating asset.

Anna Minton www.theguardian.com

If the price of food had increased at the same rate as house prices in the UK over the past 50 years, then today a chicken would cost just under £70. As average house prices in London are more than twice as high as the rest of the country, in the capital that chicken would cost almost £140.

The government response to soaring inflation is to promise to build more homes at speed by loosening the planning system. It is a “supply side” solution, which sounds logical: rapidly increase the number of homes being built and prices will inevitably come down. It is a highly contentious approach, which cost the Conservatives the Chesham and Amersham byelection, but it sounds as if it should work.

The problem is that the housing market does not function like a pure market, and while the UK does have some of the highest prices in the world the affordability crisis is not a peculiarly British issue; it’s a global problem, with an index by the property consultants Knight Frank revealing that global residential prices have risen by more than 60% in the past 10 years.

Cities around the world, from Auckland to Vancouver, are facing an affordability crisis, with huge price rises and extreme gentrification in cities linked to global capital flows and foreign investment rather than local circumstances. This ensures that increased supply will not bring prices down; the new luxury apartment complexes that now characterise British cities such as London, Manchester, Bristol and York, to name but a few, remain out of reach for the majority of house buyers. Many are sold “off plan”, straight to foreign investors, before they have even been built.

The flood of global capital into cities followed the financial crisis and has been driven by low or negative interest rates, the growing dominance of global private equity in real estate and quantitative easing, the policy of creating trillions of pounds of electronic money pursued by the Bank of England, the Federal Reserve and the European Central Bank. In the UK £445bn was created between 2009 and 2016, which went disproportionately into the hands of the richest, who ploughed it disproportionately into property. Between March and November 2020, a further £450bn was funnelled into the economy, which is predicted to have a similarly distorting effect on the housing market.

The irony is that while house prices have soared around the world, they are generally left out of central banks’ calculations on inflation. In the UK, food, clothes, furniture, cars and holidays are all included in the government’s preferred inflation index, the consumer price index (CPI), but house prices are not. The European Central Bank is looking at measuring the role of housing in the rising cost of living in a forthcoming strategic policy review, but there is little likelihood of the UK doing the same.

This is the global context for our extreme housing crisis, which is further fuelled by local circumstances. Chief among these are a private sector lacking incentives to produce more housing, and a social housing sector that builds very limited amounts of social and affordable housing. Margaret Thatcher’s defining policy of “right to buy”, under which more than 2m council homes were sold, continues to decimate the dwindling amount of affordable housing in England, although Scotland and Wales have halted the policy. In 1978, the year before Thatcher came to power, the government built 100,000 council homes, the private sector built 150,000 and there was no shortage of housing. Since then, private sector housebuilding figures have failed to make up the shortfall despite repeated policy incentives, such as starter homes, which have contributed to a limited rise in building but added further inflationary pressures by increasing mortgage credit.

Housebuilders are businesses accountable to their shareholders, and it is well documented that it is not in their interests to flood the market with homes, as it would damage their profits. Instead they control the rate of production and trickle out limited numbers of homes from large developments to keep prices high. As a result, repeated government reviews and politicians from both parties have consistently identified “land banking” rather than a restrictive planning system as the key barrier to supply-side solutions. There is also little incentive to build high-quality, larger homes, leaving the UK with some of the smallest homes in Europe, with the most attractive sites for developers in city centres suited to small luxury apartment developments that generate high income.

If there is widespread recognition that the planning system is not the main barrier, why are the government’s reforms so focused on loosening restrictions? This is partly because it’s a voter friendly idea outside of the Tory shires and popular with free-market Conservatives, while the interventionist policies required to genuinely affect house price inflation are seen as ideologically unpalatable.

Canada and New Zealand, which have witnessed some of the fastest house price rises in the world, have introduced policies to dampen demand from foreign investors. Canada has proposed a new tax on foreign investors and restrictions on mortgage credit, while New Zealand has instructed its Reserve Bank to consider house prices in making monetary policy decisions. Solutions involving the public sector are equally hard to envisage, such as a public housing programme or large-scale new housing developments enabled by the municipal purchase of land, which underpinned the creation of the postwar new towns and remains the European model for development.

The chief obstacle, which is also widely acknowledged in policy circles, is that there is no real desire for property prices to fall as housing investment has a direct bearing on GDP, economic growth and confidence in the economy. The paradox is that millions of individuals and families under the age of 45 may be excluded from the housing market, but millions of older voters inclined to vote Conservative stand to gain from an ever-appreciating asset.

The growing consensus is that the planning bill is unlikely to survive in its current form as it is so unpopular with swathes of Conservative MPs in vulnerable shire constituencies. The result is planning reforms that were unlikely to make a substantive difference in the first place are likely to be significantly watered down. In this way, a government claiming to liberalise the planning system can appeal to its free-market wing, while also appeasing the no-development lobby in the shires. It may be clever politics, which produces a lot of noise about the need to build, but it obscures the causes of the housing crisis instead of addressing them.

• Anna Minton is the author of Big Capital: Who is London For? and reader in architecture at the University of East London

Putting a road through “would’ve ruined it”.

Some councillors in favour of the road worry about the district falling behind its targets to build new homes and the threat of the government stepping in to force planning decisions on the council.

Joe Ives, local democracy reporter www.radioexe.co.uk 

Plans to build an access road across a popular park have been rejected by North Devon District Council.

The council had been considering selling Westacott Park to a developer with a view to building a secondary access road for a new housing development.

The council’s strategy and resources committee voted six to three against controversial proposals put forward by developer Progress Land Ltd. 

The park had been earmarked by the council as a potential access road to a development of more than 130 new homes.

Councillor David Knight, who voted against the plans, said:  “It’s a contentious decision but personally I’m not happy with selling a park to put a road in the middle of it.”

“It’s an intimate space which people use and frankly putting a road through it would have ruined it.”

Progress Land intended to acquire the park from the council for an undisclosed fee. If their plans were accepted, they promised to build a new park and improve what remains of the current Westacott Park by furnishing it with new equipment.

The road, which would have covered more than 10 per cent of the park, has divided local opinion.

Some councillors in favour of the road worry about the district falling behind its targets to build new homes and the threat of the government stepping in to force planning decisions on the council.

One of those to vote in favour of the plans was Councillor John Patrinos (Independent, Lynton and Lynmouth) who warned: “We can’t afford to stop these houses being built.

“If we do then, according to the rules laid down by government, we’re not going to have a five-year land supply for our local plan.” 

Councillors from both sides agree that alternative plans for the access road need to be more developed and put forward to the council.

Julie Hunt (Lib Dem, Barnstaple with Westacott) welcomed the result whilst recognising the need for an alternative.

Councillor Hunt also warned that the road, unpopular with many residents, might not be off the table for good:  “It can always come back. There’s nothing set in stone.” 

“I’ll be very surprised if we’ve heard the last of it.”

In a parallel universe might some of these have been dumped on greenfield sites in East Devon? – Owl

Daniel Clark www.devonlive.com 

Councillors are being asked to back plans for work on assessing the feasibility of plans for around 5,000 homes to be provided in Marsh Barton.

As part of the Liveable Exeter programme, Exeter City Council are aiming to deliver up to 12,000 new homes in inclusive and sustainable communities in order to meet the forecast housing need of the city into the future.

As part of the Liveable Exeter vision, Marsh Barton offers the largest opportunity within the Liveable Exeter programme to deliver a significant number of new homes as part of a mixed use community.

It has the potential to become more than just a dormitory suburb and become a new town within the city, building on Garden Community principles with scope to deliver up to 5,000 new homes as part of a mixed use community.

Grant funding totalling £625,000 has recently been secured to progress work related to the Liveable Exeter programme and fund the Liveable Exeter programme team, and Exeter City Council’s executive, when they meet next Tuesday, are recommended to approve the budget to progress work related to the Liveable Exeter programme, and for the creation of two new, fixed-term posts as part of the team.

The work will consider how to unlock the redevelopment of this part of the city to deliver a new mixed-use city quarter.

As part of the vision for the scheme, ‘mobility hubs, linear parks and digital connectivity will all take the place of expanding car parks and roads and offer the opportunity to create a ground-breaking development anchored around a comprehensive and sustainable urban mobility network’.

The future Marsh Barton will connect with Water Lane and the City Centre, to become a super-connected place which builds on existing under-utilised and redundant infrastructure to deliver world-class sustainable and active travel opportunities.

The plans could see around 5,000 homes built, mainly in flats, remain an important employment and retail area, but with the integration of living and working where uses are compatible, to make better use of riverside location, as well as new work space, and community space and school sites.

Richard Marsh, Liveable Exeter programme director and interim city development lead, in his report to the executive, said: “The Liveable Exeter programme is the council’s transformational housing delivery programme. It seeks to deliver up to 12,000 new homes in a series of new inclusive and sustainable communities, focused on major brownfield development sites within the city.

“This way of working marks a distinct change to previous growth strategies which sought to meet housing growth demands within the Greater Exeter area through greenfield development and is consistent with the council’s focus on achieving the net-zero targets and delivering on the Exeter 2040 Vision.”

He added: “Having a good understanding of the opportunities and challenges associated with the long-term redevelopment of the Marsh Barton area will also mean that the city council, and its partners’, are in a good position to be able to develop and evidence bids and business cases to support applications for government grant funding and infrastructure investment – likely to be required in order to unlock a strategic project of this scale, complexity and nature.

“It also allows the city council and its partners to act in a coordinated and strategic manner in order to realise shared objectives. An important element of the work will also involve considering how public sector land ownerships within the vicinity of Marsh Barton can be consolidated, rationalised or relocated in order to accelerate the timely release of public sector land assets within the area – in line with the Liveable Exeter Vision.”

The executive is recommended to note and then for the full council to approve the successful application for, and receipt of, Garden Communities capacity funding to support the Liveable Exeter programme and approves a budget of up to £475,000, to be funded by an earmarked reserve, to progress work related to the Liveable Exeter programme.

They are also recommended to note the successful application for, and grant of, One Public Estate funding to support the progression of feasibility and technical work on Marsh Barton in line with the Liveable Exeter vision and approves a budget of up to £150,000, to be funded by claims to Devon County Council as lead partner , in order to progress the work, and the creation of two new, fixed-term posts within the Liveable Exeter team to be funded utilising a proportion of the Garden Communities capacity funding.

Eight sites across Exeter are mentioned as part of the Liveable Exeter vision, including the Marsh Barton plans.

They are:

1: Red Cow Village (St David’s) – 664 homes in a new neighbourhood based around the historic Red Cow Village near Exeter St David’s railway station. It will provide a strong sense of arrival benefits Exeter’s identity, status and culture, a new neighbourhood, including new work space, and use of under-utilised station buildings, as well as space for shops and leisure, work space, and a new Exeter St David’s station building and the refurbishment of Great Western Hotel

2: Water Lane – The Water Lane project can deliver a new community at the scale of a new town close to the city centre, as the riverside site has the potential to become home to around 14,000 people. The vision for Water Lane is as an enterprising, self-sustaining community, a place to work as well as to live close to the city’s best loved assets. This will be a walkable place where day to day needs can be met without the use of a car. The plans could see 1,567 homes, a space for expanding leisure attractions near the quay, with low traffic or car-free development with attractive cycle and walking connections, shops and leisure, work space, as well as other community space and a primary school,

3: Marsh Barton – Marsh Barton offers the largest opportunity within the Liveable Exeter programme to deliver a significant number of new homes as part of a mixed use community, with the potential to become more

than just a dormitory suburb and become a new town within the city, building on Garden Community principles with scope to deliver up to 5,000 new homes as part of a mixed use community.

Mobility hubs, linear parks and digital connectivity will all take the place of expanding car parks and roads and offer the opportunity to create a ground-breaking development anchored around a comprehensive and sustainable urban mobility network, and the future Marsh Barton will connect with Water Lane and the City Centre, to become a super-connected place which builds on existing under-utilised and redundant infrastructure to deliver world-class sustainable and active travel opportunities.

The plans will see 5,544 homes, remain an important employment and retail area, but with the integration of living and working where uses are compatible, to make better use of riverside location, as well as new work space, and community space and school sites.

4: East Gate – The plans for East Gate would provide Exeter with an enhanced approach to the City Centre from the east, reducing traffic on the Heavitree Road and allowing for improved public transport and walking and cycling routes, the East Gate development is an exciting opportunity for communities in St Leonards and Newtown.

It would include 962 new homes, shops and leisure units, including the new St Sidwell’s Point leisure centre, work space, including a relocated Civic Centre, and community space.

5: West Gate – The plans for West Gate would open up access to the river and canal from the city centre and will provide Exeter with a new cultural destination on the river. It will expand and connect the park at the heart of the city around the historic bridge and promote active travel across the river with an iconic and Green Bridge over the River Exe at Exe Bridges.

It would include 617 new homes, shops and leisure units, work space, a cultural venue on the river, and a new St Thomas railway station entrance.

6: South Gate – The South Gate site will establish an improved link between the city centre and the historic quayside, giving greater emphasis to the Roman wall, city gates and Southernhay, linking from Southernhay to the quay. This development will provide Exeter with a new arrival to the city centre from Topsham Road.

The plans include 300 new homes, a greater emphasis on the wall, city gates and Southernhay, retail and leisure units, work space, and retained car parking at Cathedral and Quay

7: North Gate – Uncovering the medieval city wall between Friernhay and Northernhay Gardens, the North Gate site will provide a new approach to the city from Saint David’s along with new residential space in the heart of the city.

It includes 308 new homes, a new living opportunity at density in the heart of the city, retail and leisure space, and car parking retained at Mary Arches, with the scheme assumes ground floor commercial with residential above

8: Sandy Gate – The plans would see 1,050 new homes in a new sustainable and well connected mixed-use neighbourhood, bridging the city and the new and existing neighbourhoods to the east, providing recreational, cultural and entertainment space where Exeter meets the newly formed Clyst Valley Park.

As well as homes, would include shops, leisure, work space, and space for sports and education provision.

The British government has “no record” of how a meeting was set up between former health secretary Matt Hancock and a firm that has donated more than £1m to the Conservatives.

Martin Williams www.opendemocracy.net 

The company, Bridgemere Group, holds a significant stake in a private health firm that was later awarded a multimillion-pound COVID contract.

The Department of Health has been accused of “very serious” transparency failures after openDemocracy learned that another healthcare investor was also present at the same meeting, but not named in official records.

In January 2020, Hancock met Bridgemere chairman Steve Morgan to discuss “NHS use of private sector capacity”. The company owns a “significant stake” in one of the UK’s largest private health companies, Circle Health, which was later awarded a £346.6m contract to provide hospital beds during the COVID emergency.

Also present at the meeting was Martin Hughes, the CEO of Toscafund, which is the majority shareholder in Circle Health via its associated companies.

But neither Hughes nor Toscafund was named in official government transparency data.

Two special advisers working for the Department of Health, Allan Nixon and Emma Dean, also did not declare their attendance – despite disclosing meetings with other companies around the same time.

The revelations come amid growing concerns over government transparency. Ministers have admitted using private email addresses to conduct government business, and Hancock and other ministers have been accused of not declaring meetings with firms that later won COVID contracts.

The Department of Health told openDemocracy that it was “unable to establish who may have arranged this meeting”. A spokesperson did not comment on the failure to disclose the fact that Toscafund and two special advisers were also present.

The minutes and agenda from the meeting are also not held by the department.

Secretaries of state should not be having shady meetings with major Tory party donors

“These are deeply troubling revelations. No ifs, no buts – secretaries of state should not be having shady meetings with major Tory party donors,” Labour MP Margaret Hodge, the former chair of the Public Accounts Committee, told openDemocracy

“Why are there no proper records of the meeting? Where is the chain of accountability? Was the government trying to sell off more of our vital NHS on the eve of the pandemic?

“This whole thing absolutely stinks of another abuse of power by Matt Hancock,” she added.

Since Hancock resigned last month after breaching COVID rules by kissing a colleague in his ministerial office, it has emerged that he and other health ministers used private emails to discuss COVID contracts with business leaders.

The Sunday Times also reported that Gina Coladangelo – the adviser whom Hancock was pictured embracing – conducted government business on her private Oliver Bonas email address, the retailer set up by her husband.

According to its accounts, Bridgemere is owned via a holding company based in a tax haven. One of its subsidiary firms planned to continue claiming furlough support from the government.

Bridgemere donated £1m to the Conservative Party ahead of the 2019 election – a few months before the January 2020 meeting with Hancock. The firm has continued to donate a further £250,000 since the start of the pandemic.

Transparency failure

Revelations about Hancock’s meeting with Bridgemere have also exposed failings in the government’s handling of Freedom of Information requests.

Two separate requests about the meeting were submitted independently; one by openDemocracy, and the other by a freelance journalist. But despite asking the same questions, they received different responses.

openDemocracy was told that “no record” was held of who attended the meeting. But a freelance journalist – who shared the response with openDemocracy – was provided with the names of four people, including Toscafund’s Martin Hughes and Bridgemere’s Steve Morgan. Bridgemere and Toscafund are major financial backers of Circle Health.

It also reveals that a document discussing Circle Health was circulated in relation to the January 2020 meeting. The document says: “More use should be made of the independent sector to speed up patients’ access to care”.

It adds: “Overall independent sector has c8,500 beds, with similar spare capacity.”

Reports say the government paid around £200m a month for 8,000 private sector hospital beds when the COVID emergency hit.

Previously, the only public acknowledgement of the meeting was a reference in Hancock’s list of appointments. This list fails to mention Toscafund’s presence.

It also claims that “Circle Group” attended the meeting – in an apparent misnaming of Circle Heath. However, Circle Health categorically denies going to the meeting and none of its staff are listed as being present.

Sue Hawley, senior director at Spotlight on Corruption, said the failure to keep records of Hancock’s meeting was a “very serious breach of transparency requirements”.

“There is no excuse whatsoever for these kinds of meetings with party donors, which raise potentially very egregious conflicts of interest not to be recorded and declared,” she said. “This requires proper investigation and those responsible for this lapse need to face real consequences.”

The Labour Party has called for an independent investigation into the use of private emails by ministers during the pandemic. The party’s deputy leader, Angela Rayner, has now told openDemocracy that this should also investigate undeclared meetings.

“Matt Hancock’s first priority was always enriching his mates, not protecting the public,” she said. “This racket must end.”

This government seems intent on avoiding scrutiny… We should all be asking: what have they got to hide?

The SNP’s health spokesperson, Dr Philippa Whitford, also condemned the failure to keep records of the meeting. She said it was “utterly inappropriate… regardless of whether there’s no record because they used private emails, or no record because no record was kept”.

“If negotiations were carried out through private emails – which are not recorded and not documented – that’s just unacceptable.”

Emails released by the Good Law Project yesterday show that companies trying to win COVID contracts were directed to a Gmail account to be fast-tracked if they had connections to ministers.

A so-called “VIP lane” was already known to exist for companies offering to provide PPE during the start of the pandemic. But a second VIP lane for Test and Trace contracts has now also been revealed.

Gemma Abbott, legal director of the Good Law Project said: “This government seems intent on avoiding scrutiny, so it comes as no surprise to hear there’s no record of how a meeting with a Conservative Party donor came to pass.

“Politicians and officials relying on private communication channels to govern the country flies in the face of transparency and accountability. We should all be asking: what have they got to hide?”

The prime minister’s overriding imperative – you could tell by the very many times he said it – is to “move from universal government diktat to relying on people’s personal responsibility”. He’s basically had enough of making all the decisions, and wants someone else to have a go. Absent an obvious single candidate, he’s throwing it on to all of us.

Zoe Williams www.theguardian.com (extract)

In one way, it’s a relief, since his diktats were always so hit and miss; and yet it was a little unsettling to hear his rationale. “We must be honest: if we can’t reopen society in the next few weeks, we must ask ourselves, when will we be able to return to normal?” At least technically, it’s the middle of summer. We’re outdoors, schools will have their holiday “firebreak”, winter is when the virus is at its most powerful, so if not now, when? He sounds much more like a guy in B&Q, who’s just lost patience with looking for the right shade of white – what do you want him to do, go to Homebase? – than he does like a man carefully weighing up the intricate and often incomparable risks and benefits as have been produced for him by the nation’s finest minds. Chris Whitty and Patrick Vallance, two of those very minds, flanked him with almost palpable reluctance.

• Single storey detached annexe to front of main dwelling 10 Fairfield Close Exmouth EX8 2BNRef. No: 21/1753/FUL | Validated: Fri 25 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Single storey side extension Coombe Cottage Alma Lane Sidmouth EX10 8JPRef. No: 21/1761/FUL | Validated: Fri 25 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Formation of off road parking Paramount Musbury Road Axminster EX13 5JHRef. No: 21/1746/FUL | Validated: Thu 24 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• T1, Ash : Fell as displaying advanced stages of Ash dieback. T2, Hazel : Coppice to promote aesthetically uniform hedgerow. T3, 3 number of Apple : prune to encourage aesthetically pleasing form and healthy annual crop. T4, Sycamore : remove most northerly codominant stem closest neighbouring property. H1, Mixed species hedgerow : remove 6 number of Leylandii. Westerly Muttersmoor Road Sidmouth EX10 8RHRef. No: 21/1739/TCA | Validated: Fri 25 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Conversion of roof space to habitable use to include a rear dormer and 2x front roof lights. 69 Green Close Exmouth EX8 3QBRef. No: 21/1737/FUL | Validated: Wed 23 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Construction of first floor extension, and provision of additional side facing windows Summerhay Venn Ottery Road Newton Poppleford Sidmouth EX10 0BURef. No: 21/1728/FUL | Validated: Fri 25 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Change of use from workshop to 5 letting properties and associated works The Old Workshop Kerslakes Court Honiton EX14 1FLRef. No: 21/1714/FUL | Validated: Fri 25 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• T1, T2 Beech : remove the lowest branches overhanging my property to a height of 4.5 metres above ground level 7 Bennetts Hill Sidmouth EX10 9XHRef. No: 21/1716/TRE | Validated: Mon 21 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Conversion of office and garage to habitable annex Daleside Exton Exeter EX3 0PPRef. No: 21/1709/FUL | Validated: Mon 21 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Side extension to existing garage. Crossways Oakhayes Road Woodbury Exeter EX5 1JTRef. No: 21/1710/FUL | Validated: Mon 21 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision

• Erection of a single storey extension at the rear of the existing bungalow. 2 Honeysuckle Drive Honiton EX14 2YLRef. No: 21/1717/FUL | Validated: Wed 23 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Detached side car port, side balcony, installation of flue, and modified front entrance Lower Knoll Douglas Avenue ExmouthRef. No: 21/1702/FUL | Validated: Fri 25 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Single storey side extension to the main Farmhouse. Loxbrook Farm Broadclyst Exeter EX5 3BNRef. No: 21/1697/LBC | Validated: Mon 21 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Single storey side extension to the main Farmhouse. Loxbrook Farm Broadclyst Exeter EX5 3BNRef. No: 21/1696/FUL | Validated: Mon 21 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Construction of detached building (retrospective) and use as main dwelling with original dwelling to be used as an annexe. Steepyfields Cooks Lane Axminster EX13 5SQRef. No: 21/1690/FUL | Validated: Wed 23 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Structural stabilisation works to restore the structural integrity of the masonry to the front (north-facing), side (east-facing) and rear (south-facing) elevations. Stout Mills Yarcombe Honiton EX14 9LZRef. No: 21/1679/LBC | Validated: Thu 24 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Replacement of existing boundary fence with an acoustic fence. Pine Ridge Higher Marley Road Exmouth EX8 5DTRef. No: 21/1682/FUL | Validated: Mon 21 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Two storey rear extension with associated works Cleverhayes Farm Cotleigh Honiton EX14 9HQRef. No: 21/1681/FUL | Validated: Tue 22 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Single storey side/front extension 11 Hornbeam Close Honiton EX14 2UBRef. No: 21/1677/FUL | Validated: Wed 23 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Erection of a two storey detached dwelling with associated parking and amenity space Higher Thatch Ebford Lane Ebford Exeter EX3 0QXRef. No: 21/1670/FUL | Validated: Mon 21 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision

• 3no. single storey 3-bed detached dwellings with associated parking and amenity space to replace 3no. agricultural buildings Upexe Farm Upexe EX5 5NDRef. No: 21/1674/FUL | Validated: Tue 22 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Single storey front extension, single storey side extension including conversion of garage to habitable use, and conversion of roof space to habitable use with a side dormer and 4no. roof windows. 12 Grove Hill Colyton EX24 6ETRef. No: 21/1675/FUL | Validated: Wed 23 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Erection of a single storey side extension 33 Maple Drive Exmouth EX8 5NRRef. No: 21/1661/FUL | Validated: Wed 23 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Removal and reinstatement of part of front wall to garden to create off road parking to support installation of electric vehicle charging point. Figgins Church Road Lympstone Exmouth EX8 5JTRef. No: 21/1652/LBC | Validated: Wed 23 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Creation of off road parking to support installation of electric vehicle charging point Figgins Church Road Lympstone Exmouth EX8 5JTRef. No: 21/1651/FUL | Validated: Wed 23 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Extension to existing flat roof dormer on rear roof slope of dwelling.20 Burnside Exmouth EX8 3AHRef. No: 21/1653/CPL | Validated: Fri 25 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Erection of office, light industry, builders yard and associated works. Land North Of Abbey Gate Axminster EX13 8TJRef. No: 21/1639/FUL | Validated: Mon 21 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Erection of 6 X Animal Stylos Crealy Barton Sidmouth Road Clyst St Mary Exeter EX5 1DRRef. No: 21/1630/FUL | Validated: Mon 21 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Reposition door from rear elevation to side north west elevation (revised scheme to listed building consent 17/0697/LBC) 4 Oak Bridge Sidbury Sidmouth EX10 0SERef. No: 21/1628/LBC | Validated: Tue 22 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Extension of existing silage pit by 45 meters Lower Westcott Farm Talaton Exeter EX5 2RNRef. No: 21/1595/AGR | Validated: Thu 24 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision

• Erection Of a Storage Barn The Chestnuts Goldsmith Lane All Saints Axminster EX13 7LTRef. No: 21/1603/FUL | Validated: Mon 21 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Variation of condition No. 2 (approved plans) of planning permission ref: 18/2261/FUL 198 Withycombe Village Road Exmouth EX8 3BDRef. No: 21/1593/VAR | Validated: Thu 24 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Creation of a heat substation with associated access, landscaping and security fencing. Land Off Hawkins Road Broadclyst West ClystRef. No: 21/1589/FUL | Validated: Thu 24 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Outline planning permission for a proposed single storey detached dwelling (all matters reserved) Elsdon House (Land At Orchard Cottage) Elsdon Lane West HillRef. No: 21/1565/OUT | Validated: Fri 25 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Erection of detached garage Solway Cottage Whitford Axminster EX13 7NWRef. No: 21/1506/FUL | Validated: Mon 21 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Erection of detached garage Solway Cottage Whitford Axminster EX13 7NWRef. No: 21/1507/LBC | Validated: Mon 21 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Barn conversion to 4-bed detached dwelling Little Ash Farm Bungalow Fenny Bridges Honiton EX14 3BLRef. No: 21/1421/PDQ | Validated: Mon 21 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Increasing height of garden wall from 1.3m to 1.6m and garden alterations Horstone Farm Pinn Sidmouth EX10 0NNRef. No: 21/1405/FUL | Validated: Wed 23 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Car park improvements (see parent application number 21/1392/FUL) Frying Pan Car Park The Common ExmouthRef. No: 21/1444/FUL | Validated: Tue 22 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Car park improvements Joneys Cross Car Park Hawkerland Colaton RaleighRef. No: 21/1392/FUL | Validated: Tue 22 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision

• Car park improvements (see parent application number 21/1392/FUL) Four Firs Car Park (Woodbury Common) WoodburyRef. No: 21/1443/FUL | Validated: Tue 22 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Car park improvements (see parent application number 21/1392/FUL) Stowford Woods Car Park Colaton RaleighRef. No: 21/1442/FUL | Validated: Tue 22 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• Construction of replacement single storey lean-to building Highfield Garage Dunkeswell Honiton EX14 4QHRef. No: 21/1389/FUL | Validated: Wed 23 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision
• T1, T2 Beech : lift the crown of the two trees to an approximate height of 5m where they overhang the neighbours property to the east; branches will be removed or reduced as appropriate cutting back to joints or growth points; the maximum diameter of cuts will be 100mm. 5 West Lodge Rousdon Lyme Regis DT7 3XPRef. No: 21/1387/TCA | Validated: Fri 25 Jun 2021 | Status: Awaiting decision

Boris Johnson is set to spark a political row this week by announcing plans to seize greater control of the NHS, despite warnings that the “power grab” will see ministers blamed for delays in treatment and closure of local hospital units.

Denis Campbell www.theguardian.com

The prime minister has told the new health secretary, Sajid Javid, to put the long-awaited health and care bill before parliament despite Javid’s own misgivings and concerns among hospital bosses and doctors’ leaders.

Conservative MPs are becoming increasingly anxious that the bill, which involves the biggest shake-up of the NHS in England in a decade, could become a damaging political drama, make people question Tory handling of the NHS and prove a gift to Labour, which last week called for the bill to be scrapped.

Javid is expected to lay the bill before parliament on Tuesday after the prime minister overruled his plea to delay its introduction until the autumn. Johnson has told Matt Hancock’s successor to press ahead with the legislation despite Javid’s concern that it will prove “controversial” and involves “significant areas of contention” which have yet to be resolved.

The health secretary’s new powers would enable him to abolish NHS arm’s-length bodies and intervene much earlier in deciding if an A&E or maternity unit deemed unsafe, over staffing problems for example, had to shut.

Hospital bosses have voiced serious concern to the Guardian about the government’s plan to hand Javid such big new “powers of direction”. The NHS Confederation and NHS Providers, the two groups which represent health service trusts, both warned that this could allow ministers to wield undue influence over the NHS and reduce its independence.

Matthew Taylor, the confederation’s chief executive, said health service chiefs were broadly supportive of the bill, which seeks to undo some of the most damaging effects of the last Tory overhaul of the NHS – then health secretary Andrew Lansley’s Health and Social Care Act 2012.

But, Taylor added: “They remain concerned that some of the proposals could lead to heavy handed ministerial involvement in day-to-day matters affecting the NHS, such as the closing or opening of new services for patients, which could go against the advice and expertise of local leaders who know what is best for their communities.

“We can’t risk playing political football with the NHS given the challenges it faces.”

NHS Providers cautioned that the heath secretary’s beefed-up powers could lead to service chiefs nationally and locally coming “under political pressure or interference”.

Saffron Cordery, its deputy chief executive, said: “There is no suggestion here that a publicly-funded service like the NHS should not be held to account. Rather, that the strategic direction is the domain of politicians, who should then allow the people involved in operational and clinical roles – with day-to-day responsibility for supporting patient care – the space to deliver those strategic objectives without undue political pressure or interference.”

The bill will replace the clinical commissioning groups Lansley’s reforms created with new bodies known as integrated care systems – regional groupings of providers of different sorts of healthcare working with their counterparts in social care.

Ben Howlett, a former Tory MP who is now the managing director of the Public Policy Projects thinktank, warned Johnson that the move could backfire.

“As a result of the new Health and Care Act, ministers will no longer need to horsetrade with NHS bosses to set priorities, as the secretary of state makes himself directly accountable for the provision of services,” Howlett said.

“MPs will for the first time in over a decade find constituents asking why there are long waiting lists and poor cancer outcomes without being able to write to [NHS England chief executive] Simon Stevens for answers. My advice to the new secretary of state – beware the law of unintended consequences.”

One health policy expert, who asked not to be named, said: “Politically this bill is a tricky sell, even though the government has an 80-seat majority. The penny is dropping among MPs that there’s more in the bill than just boring, technocratic NHS issues.

“How does this bill help tackle key NHS challenges like waiting times and chronic understaffing? It doesn’t. That may become a problem.”

The bill, which only relates to the NHS in England, does include plans to reduce some privatisation by removing the duty on the NHS to put care contracts out to tender. However, the British Medical Association, the doctors’ union, warned that it could lead to the new integrated care systems (ICSes) offering large contracts to private firms without any tendering process, in a repeat of the “Tory cronies” scandal, involving billions of pounds of deals for personal protective equipment (PPE) for NHS staff, seen during the Covid pandemic.

Dr David Wrigley, the BMA’s deputy chair of council, said: “We are concerned that private health providers like Virgin Care could be given seats on the boards of ICSes and therefore potentially be involved in deciding who gets what contracts. And we are very concerned that the bill could means that contracts are just handed out to the private sector, without a tendering process.”

The bill is the first of a series of important decisions that Javid, who is barely a week into his new role as the boss of the Department of Health and Social Care, will have to take in the next fortnight.

He and the board of NHS England are close to deciding who will succeed Stevens, who is stepping down this month after more than seven years in the job. Ministers want his replacement to have a much lower profile and not cause trouble by regularly lobbying in public for the NHS to be given more money and the government to radically reform social care, as Stevens has done.

The new NHS boss, whoever it is, will have significantly less power than that wielded by Stevens, as a result of the legislation.

Reports on Sunday said that Javid had ruled out Dido Harding, the Tory peer who runs the government’s heavily criticised test and trace programme. NHS bosses hope that will help clear the way for Amanda Pritchard, Stevens’ deputy, who is widely admired in the service after her stint running Guy’s and St Thomas’ hospital trust in London. Sir James Mackey, the chief executive of the Northumbria Healthcare trust, is also seen as a strong contender.

Javid, Johnson and the chancellor, Rishi Sunak, also have to decide imminently whether to increase the government’s 1% pay offer to NHS staff, which health unions have described as “pathetic” and “an insult”. The Royal College of Nursing is gearing up to hold its first-ever ballot of its 450,000-strong membership for possible strike action.

The NHS pay review body submitted its recommendations to Javid last week. It is thought to have advised that staff deserve more like a 2% increase, especially after their widely praised efforts during the Covid pandemic. However, the RCN is demanding 12.5%.

Teignbridge councillors have backed plans to tackle the number of empty homes in the area and bring them back into use.

Ollie Heptinstall, local democracy reporter www.radioexe.co.uk

Members of the ruling executive heard on Monday that, despite the total number more than halving since 2008, 345 homes in the district are still empty – 131 of which have been unoccupied for two years or more and are classified as ‘truly empty’.

The overall figure increased last year by 22: blamed on the impact of the pandemic and the temporary slowdown of the housing market during stricter lockdowns.

Councillors approved a policy to try to reduce the number of long-term empty homes, which includes possible enforcement action, compulsory purchase orders and enforced sales if owners fail to co-operate.

Presenting the empty homes policy document, Councillor Martin Wrigley (Lib Dem, Dawlish North East), portfolio holder for communities, housing and IT said: “We all know an empty home on the street can be not only problematic but a real source of problems.

“To get a better gauge we need to look at empty homes in two ways. Firstly, homes that are between occupants, waiting to obtain probate or undergoing renovation or a myriad of other specific reasons. Secondly, homes that are, as we might say, genuinely empty.

“Genuinely empty homes, or more precisely ones that have been empty for two or more years, and so start to attract increased council tax, can be a blight on their neighbours and the source of real issues in the street. This is a much lower number. This is about 131 in the district, of which under half have been empty for five years or more.”

Properties that do not classify for exemptions pay double council tax after being empty for two years: three times the rate after five years and four times after 10 years or more.

Cllr Wrigley also revealed that in the last two years the council had taken formal action on 59 properties.

The empty homes policy document states: “Bringing long term empty homes back into use helps the council address the needs of the district as well as attracting grant funding from central government – New Homes Bonus (NHB). In Teignbridge £27.6 million NHB has been raised over a 12 year period.”

“Targeting those properties which have been empty between six months and  two years is more likely to have an impact on NHB and increase income for Teignbridge District Council, whilst properties which have been empty for two years or more are more likely to have a detrimental impact on neighbours and their surrounding area.”

It says the council will work: “directly and assertively with owners of unfurnished properties empty between six months and two years by encouraging them and providing tools and mechanisms to bring their property back into use”.

The document adds: “Where owners do not respond to attempts to communicate with them and there is no evidence that they are taking action to bring about reoccupation, or where the property has been identified as ‘high risk’ using the empty property risk assessment, a zero tolerance approach will be adopted and the most appropriate enforcement action considered to bring the property back into use.”

Discussing the proposals, Councillor Stephen Purser (Con, Teign Valley), asked if councillors could be told confidentially which properties are empty in their wards.

“Obviously being a rural patch, I suspect there are some little lane places that have been overgrown for years and possibly nobody knows about them,” Cllr Purser said.

In response, Councillor Alan Connett (Lib Dem, Kenton & Starcross and leader of the council), said GDPR rules would likely not allow the council to tell a councillor which homes were empty in their wards. “In my case for example it’s usually the neighbours who tell me. I can think of several in my ward that have been reported to me by concerned residents,” Cllr Connett said.

Cllr Wrigley added: “Certainly in my patch I’m told frequently about when there is an empty home. There was one in Dawlish in a particular street that was causing real problems for the neighbours. Working with the team, we’ve now got that one being restored and I think someone’s moving into it relatively soon.”

The council said that due to limited resources, it will prioritise Newton Abbot (including Kingskerswell and Kingsteignton), Dawlish and Teignmouth due to the “high housing need” in these areas.

BUDGET SURPLUS

It came as the executive also heard that the authority is currently operating at a budget surplus of £86,570 for the current financial year, as of the end of May 2021.

Corporate services are forecast to be just over £200,000 under budget, but leisure/green space service income has been hit hard by the pandemic and general rental income has been reduced.

Taylor Wimpey, one of the UK’s biggest housebuilders, opposed government plans to slash carbon dioxide emissions from new homes by at least three-quarters and argued against heat pumps, which are proposed as a replacement for gas boilers, one of the UK’s biggest causes of greenhouse gases.

Robert Booth www.theguardian.com 

The company, which typically builds about 15,000 new homes a year, told a consultation that a target of cutting CO₂ emissions from new homes by 75% to 80% from 2025 was “too high” and argued that heat pumps would be too expensive and would disappoint customers with their performance.

Its position was revealed through a freedom of information request by Unearthed, the investigations arm of the environmental charity Greenpeace. Housing accounts for 15% of UK greenhouse gas emissions, and that does not include electricity produced in power stations. Natural gas burned for heating and cooking is the main contributor.

It placed Taylor Wimpey in a small minority of only 2% of such responses to the government consultation into its future homes standard. The majority said the target was not ambitious enough.

Barratt, Berkeley and Thakeham homes all supported the target, as did the Home Builders Federation, which represents housebuilders, according to the response released under environmental transparency laws.

Greenpeace claimed it showed the housebuilder tried to derail an important climate policy, but Taylor Wimpey strongly denied this and said it was identifying challenges about the practical implementation of the cuts.

Housing emissions remain stubbornly high with only 1m tonnes equivalent CO₂ cut from 2018 to 2019 compared with cuts of 8.5m tonnes from energy supply, 2.2m for transport and 2.5m by businesses, official figures show. Advocates for greener housing hoped the government would bring forward stricter limits on CO₂ emissions for new homes to 2023, but they announced in February it would happen two years later.

Ministers are shortly due to publish a new heat and buildings strategy, which could set an end date for the use of household gas heating and plans for accelerating the installation of heat pumps, which are currently two to three times more expensive than combi boilers.

Taylor Wimpey told the government in the consultation, which ended in February 2020: “There is a lack of evidence to support the viable delivery of the future homes standard of 75-80% less CO₂ emissions within the proposed timescale with existing skills training and supply chain availability.”

It said heat pumps would be less efficient, more expensive by up to £200 a year on a three-bedroom home and less reliable in colder weather.

Asked about its view last week, Wimpey said it recognised the need for urgency to mitigate the climate crisis and that its consultation response was intended to identify “challenges relating to the practical implementation of the proposals”, which “led to concerns that the delivery of viable and much-needed new housing could be prejudiced”.

It said it “remains fully supportive of the UK government’s target to achieve net zero emissions by 2050. We also embrace the future homes standard with its ambition to reduce carbon emissions from homes in use by 75-80% by 2025.” It added that it had cut carbon emissions from its building sites, offices and vehicles by 39% over the last eight years.

The government has pressed ahead with the policy to significantly cut carbon dioxide emissions from new homes compared with current building regulations on thermal performance, which are set to be changed next summer.

Greenpeace UK’s head of climate, Kate Blagojevic, said: “We urgently need government policies that force housebuilders to start building homes fit for a zero-carbon future because it’s clear the industry won’t do it by themselves. Not only will this slash emissions but it will also make people’s homes warmer, cheaper to run and, with the right incentives, create a domestic heat pump and green homes industry that would deliver new jobs and boost the economy.”