Scandalous spending tracker

That’s right, the UK Government has scandalously spent £125,554,393,254 since 2019.

As Chancellor and now Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak has had responsibility for government spending for almost all of this period.

Posted by Best for Britain www.bestforbritain.org 

It’s easy to become numb to the scale and frequency of the Government’s fiscal ineptitude and dodginess, and all at a time when ordinary people struggle to pay bills and public services are crumbling.

The total does not include the catastrophic hit to public finances from the Government’s Brexit deal which has crippled businesses, slowed economic growth, and is estimated to be costing around £100bn per year. Similarly, the total does not include the titanic economic cost of the disastrous mini-budget which increased bills for mortgage payers across the country and which ended Liz Truss’ premiership after 6 weeks.

It does, however, include figures like the devastating £290m sunk on the Government’s cruel, unworkable and unlawful Rwanda Deal. It also includes a whopping £2.3bn spent on cancelled parts of HS2, and £50m spent on a new helicopter for top Tories. 

We’ll keep it updated as new revelations come to light so check back to get the latest eye-watering figure. What’s clear is that every day this government remains in power is more money wasted. Find out what we’re doing about it at GetVoting.org.

The data

The total figure is an estimate using publicly available data. You can find the full list of scandalous spending along with sources here. 

We’ve categorised each entry as either a Crony Contract (such as giving government contracts to Conservative chums), a Duff Deal (like blowing billions on stuff that doesn’t work) or an Outrageous Outgoing (including spending silly money on interior design).

Keep informed

Make sure you keep up to date, join Best for Britain’s mailing list and be the first to hear about our work and campaigns.

Does this government reinforce success? Invest in preparedness for the next pandemic? Of course not. – Owl

It changed the treatment of Covid-19 patients across the globe, saved thousands of lives by pinpointing cheap, effective drugs during the pandemic, and earned Britain widespread praise from international groups of scientists.

Robin McKie www.theguardian.com 

But now government support for the UK Recovery programme is to end. In a few weeks’ time, central financing for the programme will halt. The scheme will only be able to continue thanks to funding from a group of US-based philanthropists.

The move has dismayed senior scientists who say it is another worrying example of the UK’s life sciences sector being short-changed by government. “We knew Recovery had huge potential and that was realised in a very short period during Covid. But now that dream is being unrealised,” said Prof Peter Horby, one of the co-founders of Recovery.

And it is not just the value of Recovery that has been ignored as the pandemic has ended, added Horby. “Britain did some of the world’s best clinical trials, vaccine development, and genomics work, but a lot of that has just been thrown away or starved of investment. Yet we badly need to be alert to the dangers of future pandemics.”

Recovery – the Randomised Evaluation of Covid-19 Therapy – is a drug-testing programme that, at the height of the pandemic, involved thousands of doctors and nurses working with tens of thousands of Covid-19 patients in hospitals across Britain. Trials were carried out in intensive care units and wards crammed with seriously ill patients.

“In day-to-day, regular clinical medicine, it’s absolutely critical to work out the difference between what you think might work, what actually works – and what doesn’t,” said Prof Martin Landray, Recovery’s other co-founder. “Recovery did exactly that.”

The programme managed to pinpoint four effective medicines, while conclusively showing that eight overhyped drugs were not. For example, the anti-malarial drug hydroxychloroquine – widely touted by Donald Trump as a Covid-19 treatment – was shown to provide no help for patients. By contrast, dexamethasone, a cheap treatment for inflammation and arthritis, was found to reduce deaths by a third among patients on ventilators in ICUs. No other nation came close to matching these achievements.

“Other countries, including Canada and the US, have made it clear they are extremely envious of what Britain did with Recovery and are preparing to spend considerable sums in setting up similar schemes – at a time when we seem to be losing interest collectively in the programme. And I think that is a shame,” added Landray.

Recovery in the UK will survive thanks to Flu Lab, an American philanthropic organisation dedicated to battling the future flu epidemics, with the programme being extended to investigate new treatments for flu as well as Covid under the new deal.

The decision by the UK government not to continue to support Recovery comes against a worrying background, which has seen Britain fall badly behind other countries in conducting clinical studies, where new medicines are tested on volunteers to make sure they are safe and work, and to monitor any side effects. The Swiss firm Novartis recently scrapped a large trial of a cholesterol drug in Britain, for example.

“We’ve been dropping down the league table when it comes to doing trials so that we are now below Italy, Poland, France and many other countries. The state of the NHS is part of the problem but it is nevertheless worrying,” said Horby.

“I welcome the government’s ambition for the UK to become a scientific superpower but if you look at what is happening today, we seem to be heading in the wrong direction.”

This point was backed by Landray, who warned that it was crucial the UK was prepared for the arrival of future pandemics. “You don’t get ready to fight the next war by disbanding the army just because it’s peacetime,” he told the Observer.

Jeremy Hunt has given over £100k to local Tory party in effort to retain seat

Jeremy Hunt has been forced to contribute more than £100,000 of his own money to his constituency Conservative party to bolster his chances of re-election, official records show, amid warnings that he is set to lose his seat.

Aletha Adu www.theguardian.com 

Hunt’s Godalming and Ash constituency is a target seat for the Liberal Democrats, and a Survation poll projects that he is on course to become the first chancellor in modern times to lose at a general election.

Electoral Commission records show that he has given £105,261 to the South-west Surrey Conservative association over the last five years.

The chancellor’s personal donations to the association under the last three Conservative prime ministers stand in stark contrast to the total £4,447 he gifted under the leadership of Theresa May and David Cameron.

The most recent accounts for Hunt’s local association have warned that its “balance sheet is at a less than satisfactory level”. A note stated that members’ annual subscriptions were due to increase this year.

Donations to the chancellor’s association were down by almost 50% in 2021. South West Surrey received only £42,693 in donationsthat year, down from over £80,000 in 2020.

A Labour source said: “This tells you everything you need to know about the state of the Conservative party, with the chancellor seemingly spending more time dishing out personal cheques to prolong his political career than fixing the economy his government has wrecked.

“And on the same day the chancellor is talking about clamping down on money being wasted, he might want to look at how he is spending some of his own money.”

Hunt said on Sunday: “I hope to be chancellor after the election.” However, the poll in his constituency shows the Lib Dems on 35% of the vote, the Tories on 29% and Labour on 22%. When local voters were asked to outline the issues that would determine how they would vote, health and the NHS was top, while only 4% said tax was a key issue.

Daisy Cooper, the deputy leader of the Liberal Democrats, said: “It’s no wonder that Jeremy Hunt is on the brink of his losing his seat when people across Surrey are furious they can’t get GP appointments, that their hospitals have been left to crumble, and water firms are still allowed to pollute their rivers.

“In the chancellor’s own back yard, food bank demand is surging after his government failed to get a grip on the cost of living crisis. Liberal Democrats are fired up in Surrey to oust Conservative MPs who have taken people for granted.”

Correspondence with Karen Crawford, Exmouth resident and year round swimmer, reveals how South West Water (SWW) could be “gaming” the much trumpeted tougher regulations to their, but not our, advantage.

Water companies now have to fit emergency discharge monitors (EDM) on combined sewer outfalls to report spills and their duration (not volume). This will be a metric which politicians will use to demonstrate that our rivers and bathing waters are “improving” and water companies will use to award bonuses and avoid penalties. 

SSW claim that they are investing £38m in Exmouth and Sandy bay to reduce pollution.

It seems that, so far, an impressive £14m has been invested in upgrading the main Exmouth discharge pipe out to sea from Sandy Bay/Straight Point. 

Do you remember seeing this strange floating structure off Straight Point in 2022?

This means that much more treated water can be discharged in normal circumstances and raw sewage in times of overload. Possibly four times as much.

However, improvements to the Maer Lane treatment works are only at an initial or “concept” stage for starting in 2028. I.e.there will be no increase in treatment capacity until at least then, realistically a lot, lot later. And we continue to build more houses.

Meanwhile, SWW is giving priority to upgrading the pumps at surrounding sewage pumping stations. These are tanks used to collect local sewage which is then pumped to the treatment works. Improving the pumps means they will be able to reduce the discharges at 5 or 6 EDM sites by increasing capacity to send more sewage directly out to sea through the trunk main. So 5 or 6 potential discharges could be reduced to a single, combined one, instead.

Remember, SWW committed to building treatment works for the new development locally at Cranbrook but changed their mind and used Countess Weir. Now, Maer Lane and Countess Weir have no spare capacity at all. Both treatment works discharge at the first sign of rain.

So investing in increasing the pipe capacity from Maer Lane into the sea and upgrading the pumps at pumping stations, is a quick win for the government and SWW but doesn’t do anything for us or the environment.

Sandy Bay has already gone from “Excellent” to “Sufficient” bathing water quality in just a few years. 

It all seems a bit topsy-turvy to Owl who would have thought that the first priority would be to increase treatment capacity.

Evidence can be found here.

The wildlife charity WWF-UK shelved a report that warned how intensive chicken production is devastating the River Wye, the Observer can reveal.

Jon Ungoed-Thomas www.theguardian.com 

Since 2018, the charity has received more than £6m in donations from the supermarket chain Tesco, which has faced action from campaigners over the decline of the Wye because many of the intensive poultry farms in the river’s catchment area are in its ­supply chain.

The charity was due to publish a report on fixing the food system, which included the impact of intensive chicken farming on the river. One source claimed the proposed 2022 report was pulled after concerns were raised about the potential fallout.

WWF said this weekend the report failed to meet its rigorous standards and the decision was not linked to any partnership.

But a source with knowledge of the decision said: “Shelving the report was completely the wrong thing to do. They didn’t want to rock the boat. The attitude was: ‘We’re going after a partner. What’s the point?’”

WWF’s partnership with Tesco ran from 2018 to 2023 and focused on tackling environmental impacts in the food system. The supermarket provided funding in the range of between £500,000 and £2m for each year of the partnership.

In the summer of 2022, WWF, which has been concerned about the effects of global food production on wildlife and ecology, was scheduled to publish a report on fixing the food system called “Feeling the Bite”. It warned that about a million species were threatened.

The hard-hitting report said in the UK and around the world “how we eat is driving a food production system that is destroying the planet”. It warned that a “broken” food system was putting an impossible strain on nature.

As well as highlighting the threat globally to Asian elephants and the maned wolf in South America, it documented the plight of the River Wye as a case study.

It warned that the increase in phosphate-rich manure produced by poultry farms was causing deadly algae blooms that “suffocate plants and fish, and leave birds such as kingfishers and dippers without food”.

The report was set to be published in 2022 but, the source claims, it was proposed that publication be deferred and the Wye case study removed amid concerns that environmental campaigners would highlight WWF’s partnership with Tesco.

A decision was later taken to shelve the report in its entirety. The source said that once the Wye case study had been removed, it raised questions about the report’s overall strength.

Tesco said this weekend it did not have any involvement in the report or the decision for it not to be published.

Dave Lewis, the former chief executive of Tesco, is chair of the board of trustees at WWF. The charity said he also had no involvement in the project or the decision-making surrounding it.

Natural England announced in May last year it had downgraded the condition of the River Wye to “unfavourable – declining”.

Tesco has faced criticism over its role in supporting an unsustainable supply chain in the Wye catchment.

Charles Watson, founder and chair of the charity River Action, which raises awareness of river pollution, said the boom in poultry production in the Wye catchment area had been fuelled by demand from Tesco, as well as other supermarkets. He said: “Tesco’s logo is stamped all over the Wye.”

WWF has agreed a number of corporate partnerships in recent years, including with Aviva, HSBC and the consumer goods company Reckitt. The charity’s corporate donations and income totalled £16.7m in the year to 30 June 2023, out of a total income of £94m.

A WWF spokesperson said: “We are a science-led organisation and on reviewing drafts of the report, we concluded that it did not meet our rigorous standards. The decision not to proceed with this report was not connected to any individual case study within it or our relationships with partners.

“We are deeply concerned by the devastating impact that pollution is having on the UK’s rivers, particularly the Wye, and have taken the government to court over its failure to act on river pollution. We continue to work to drive action to tackle the food system’s impacts on the environment, both in the UK and overseas.”

A Tesco spokesperson said: “This report was not part of our work with WWF and we were not involved in its development, nor any decisions about publishing it. The work of our partnership with WWF was aimed at tackling the biggest environmental impacts of our food system, including helping to protect water quality and biodiversity in supply chains.

“We’re committed to playing our part in protecting the River Wye, alongside other actors across the food industry, and have worked closely with local stakeholders since 2019 to tackle water pollution in the area.

“We’re also providing multi-year funding for a number of water catchment projects.”

A pensioner from Exeter who illegally dumped 7,000 tonnes of waste on farmland in East Devon has been jailed for failing to clear the land.

eastdevonnews.co.uk 

Roger Baker, aged 80, of Marsh Mill Court, Exeter, was convicted in August 2018 of dumping 7,514 tonnes of waste at Pynes Farm, Poltimore, in East Devon and ordered by magistrates to remove it all to a permitted site by September 2019.

Earlier this month Baker was jailed for six weeks after the Environment Agency checked the site and found Baker had repeatedly ignored a court order to clear the waste.

After pleading guilty to failing to comply with a Regulation 44 notice to remove the waste to a permitted site, Exeter magistrates sentenced Baker to six weeks’ in jail, and ordered him to pay costs of £4,731.

Baker was told he must remove the waste on his release from prison.

Following the hearing, Richard Tugwell, an officer for the Environment Agency, said: “Baker showed a flagrant disregard for the environment and repeatedly ignored the court order requiring him to remove the waste.

“The court made it clear it still expected Baker to remove the waste after he is released from prison.”

After a conviction for dumping more than 7,000 tonnes of waste near Exeter,  Baker was jailed for continually ignoring a court order to remove the waste.

A case brought by the Environment Agency, Exeter magistrates heard on February 7, 2024, that five years on, Baker still had not removed any of the waste.

A spokesperson for the Environment Agency said: “An officer from the Environment Agency went to the site last month and found all the waste still in place with little sign Baker had any intention of complying.”

Open the spreadsheet and pour out the coffee Rishi, this could be a long session! – Owl

Jeremy Hunt and Rishi Sunak will spend the weekend scrambling to piece together Wednesday’s Budget after being warned of a £2bn black hole in their original plans.

Arj Singh inews.co.uk

The Chancellor and Prime Minister were dealt a blow on Wednesday night when the Budget watchdog said their draft proposals were £2bn more expensive than allowed by the Government’s “headroom” – the amount of spare cash against a promise to get debt falling in five years.

They have since been working to repackage the Budget amid intense pressure for tax cuts that can drive economic growth and help the Conservatives close the opinion poll gap to Labour in an election year.

The pair were hoping for better news when the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) delivered another key forecast late on Friday night, and were due to spend the weekend piecing together a near-final package before Wednesday.

Treasury sources have admitted that the process of pulling together the Budget had been “hard” amid a backdrop of weeks of gloomy forecasts from the OBR, which left Mr Hunt’s headroom before policy decisions of just £13bn, £6bn of which the Chancellor wants to hold in reserve to reassure markets.

It means Mr Hunt is deciding between a 1p cut to either income tax or national insurance – a smaller tax cut than he offered in the Autumn Statement – with hopes of a 2p cut or the unfreezing of some tax thresholds fading.

The Chancellor is still considering aping Labour’s policy to scrap the controversial “non-dom” tax status as he considers a range of measures to raise money to make the Budget add up.

Mr Sunak on Friday hinted at a cut to national insurance, which dropped from 12 per cent to 10 per cent in January after the Autumn Statement.

Asked if there could be further reductions in the tax announced on Wednesday, the Prime Minister said: “The Chancellor and the UK Government chose to cut national insurance; there were lots of reasons for that, but first and foremost it is a tax on work.

“I believe in a country and society where hard work is rewarded – that’s something that’s really important to me … and all the people in the Government, and cutting national insurance is rewarding hard work.”

The free-market Institute for Economic Affairs (IEA), a think-tank influential among right-leaning Tory MPs, said the UK’s “stagnating” economy was a “disaster” for living standards and should be the “priority” in the Budget.

IEA executive director Tom Clougherty called for the scrapping of stamp duty, although this has been ruled out by Mr Hunt.

Mr Clougherty said: “If there is fiscal headroom for tax cuts, priority should be given to reforms that could have a meaningful growth effect.

“The Chancellor could make some helpful changes to corporation tax and business rates at limited cost to the Exchequer.

“The real prize, though, would be the abolition of stamp duties. There would be a fiscal hit from abolishing Stamp Duty Land Tax, but the distortions it causes in a tight housing market are so destructive that the cost is clearly worth bearing.”

Mr Clougherty also warned against abolishing non-dom status, claiming it would risk “unintended negative consequences too – with little fiscal upside”.

He added: “I hope this speculation doesn’t indicate a last-minute scramble to keep to the fiscal rules.

“Tax policy should be made for the long term – not on the fly in response to a rolling (and changeable) five-year debt forecast.”

In his latest newsletter Simon Jupp announces that he will be leading a parliamentary debate on Tuesday.

Richard Foord seems to have got there first.

He will be hosting an event in the fringes of the House of Commons on Monday. His guests will include the End Sewage Pollution Coalition, which includes the Rivers Trust, British Canoeing, the Angling Trust, River Action, Swim England, Surfers Against Sewage and the Women’s Institute. So it might be more productive.

This follows up his tabling of a bill in January to hand over  responsibility for collecting and reporting data on the number and duration of spills to the environmental regulator.

Owl fears the debate Simon Jupp will lead will seek once again to divert attention  away from the government’s record of privatisation, lax regulation and underfunding of the regulator and place all the blame on the water companies. 

Here is Owl’s summary of the first debate at the end of February last year:

Simon Jupp led the debate. Unfortunately his fellow Tories from Devon followed his lead, especially Anthony Mangnall (Totnes) and Kevin Foster (Torbay). [Though to give Anne Marie Morris (Newton Abbot) her due, she did try to rise above this.]

They let SWW off the hook from the start:

For example, here is how Simon Jupp opened the debate:

….In recent years, a spotlight has been shone on storm overflows and CSOs. Water tourism is booming across our region, including windsurfing in places such as Exmouth and Sidmouth in my constituency. However, there is another reason why people have finally started talking about the issue: the Conservative Government have put in place a plan to improve our water, giving us all an opportunity to hold water companies to account.

People finally talking about the issue of sewage because the Tories have a plan? Really!

……Of course, in a perfect world, we would stop sewage spills completely and immediately. Sadly, that is virtually impossible in the short term; because of the pressure on our water infrastructure, we would risk the collapse of the entire water network, and the eye-watering costs involved mean we would need not just a magic money tree, but a whole forest.

No short term solution because it would cost? Why so little investment over the years?

Here is Owl’s summary of the second debate last September:

A second debate on South West Water’s record was hurriedly arranged to take place before MPs break up yet again. 

As a consequence of verbose schoolboy debating antics from the proposer, Mr Liddell-Grainger MP (Bridgwater and West Somerset), and nothing new from the Minister replying to him, the debate ran out of time and lapsed. 

Owl’s take

The Tories are still in denial over the consequences of privatisation and the effect austerity cuts have had on regulators, trying to blame everyone else.

Richard Foord, MP for Tiverton & Honiton 

Everyone living near our beautiful coastline knows just how important a subject is the water quality. This is not only because many of us enjoy our local rivers and beaches recreationally, but because our blue vista is also a key driver of tourism, bringing people many miles to spend time here.

That is why the inaction of water companies like South West Water is particularly galling. Over recent years, they’ve made substantial sums of money from environmental vandalism – spilling hundreds of thousands of hours of raw sewage directly into our rivers and seas.

Thanks to the pressure of local communities and activists, a spotlight has been shone on the situation. I have affection for the creative genius that comes to the fore in a good English protest. Placards seen in Exmouth recently included: “Women Swimmin”; “No River Exe Crement”; “Species not Faeces” and my personal favourite “End Sewage Poollution”.

We see ever more reports of sewage spills at our beaches, all while Conservative ministers and MPs line up to pass the buck to water companies. We have to ask the question: where are the regulators amidst this mess? And behind them, where is the Government?

Hundreds of permits that allow water companies to dump sewage into Britain’s rivers have not been updated since the 1950s. Monitoring and reporting on sewage discharges is done ‘in-house’ by the water firms – with them holding sole responsibility to collect the data on the number and duration of spills, and for reporting too. This is a perverse situation that allows them to mark their own homework.

That’s why in January I tabled a Bill in Parliament to hand over this responsibility to the environmental regulator. I was pleased when the Environment Secretary announced he would be making this change not long afterwards, but just a few days ago it emerged that despite the announcement, there was no timeline for the change.

Next Monday I will be hosting an event in the fringes of the House of Commons on this very subject. My guests are the End Sewage Pollution Coalition, which includes the Rivers Trust, British Canoeing, the Angling Trust, River Action, Swim England, Surfers Against Sewage and the Women’s Institute.

I am also looking forward to hosting Jo Bateman, the Devon-based swimmer who is taking legal action against South West Water for dumping sewage into the sea near her home. We’ve invited the Conservative Government’s Minister for Water. Let’s hope he attends!

No it’s not Simon Jupp but Ian Liddell-Grainger – Owl

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

Bridgwater and West Somerset MP Ian Liddell-Grainger has criticised Mid Devon for sending letters to three former councillors accusing them of alleged data breaches.

The Conservative politician, who is to contest the new Tiverton and Minehead seat at the next election, asked for a debate on “rogue councils” during a debate in Westminster.

He said that Mid Devon District Council had now “threatened its former leaders with legal action for disputing what has gone on with 3 Rivers.”

Mr Liddell-Grainger  continued: “There has been a lack of scrutiny and a lack of accountability,” he said. This is millions of pounds, and not thousands.”

The comments come as Barry Warren, Bob Deed and Christine Daw all received letters from Mid Devon District Council about a “serious matter concerning your handling of confidential data.”

The letters said the individuals “may have committed a data breach” and asked them to delete any confidential information and show the council proof of this.

The letters later state that failure to comply “may result in legal actions,” including fines or other penalties.

Mr Warren, formerly an independent councillor, led the authority for three months in 2023, taking over from Mr Deed who resigned in February last year after holding the position for four years.

Ms Daw quit as a Conservative party member the same month, but retained her cabinet position as an independent until the election last May when she didn’t stand for re-election.

The trio have all been critical of 3 Rivers Developments, the council-owned property company which is now in the process of being closed down, and the alleged data breaches include documents linked to the failed housebuilder.

Mr Liddell-Grainger added: “Can we please have a debate in government time about councils’ responsibility for dealing with situations that have gone wrong, and not suing their former colleagues who are trying to do their job?”

Mid Devon District Council recently conducted a ‘lessons learned’ review of 3 Rivers, highlighting 10 aspects it would do differently if it launched another wholly owned business again.

Some members of the public criticised this, claiming that the councillors undertaking the review didn’t have long enough to carry out their work and that the group’s terms of reference should have been free of constraint.

The authority has in the past also paid external consultants, including Devon Audit Partnership, to assess the operation and viability of the firm.

Two reports in 2020 outlined 33 recommendations to improve it, and these were approved by the full council.

In relation to the letter the council sent to the three former councillors, the authority said it takes its legal responsibilities as a data controller “extremely seriously”.

A spokesperson added: “It is a matter of some regret that the council has had to write to a small number of former councillors reminding them of the need to comply with data management practices.

“However, it is important that the council takes appropriate action to ensure the effective management of data in accordance with our policies.”

Extravagant baubles and flummery or regalia signifying the dignity of an historic office?

Seaton council would have had much more power as a self governing “urban district council” prior to the incorporation of “East Devon District” in 1974, with nothing standing between it and County. It was these councils that oversaw the council house building programmes of the 50’s and 60’s.

[Owl believes that many Urban District Councils were run by elected “Chairs” rather than “Mayors” and chains of office.]

The decision to spend more than £8,000 on a mayoral chain in a Devon town has left some residents “disgusted”.

By Miles Davis www.bbc.co.uk

Seaton Town Council considered various options but voted for a new replacement chain at a cost of £8,257.

Some people living in Seaton on the south coast said it was wrong to spend the money on a mayoral chain during a cost of living crisis.

The council said the decision had been taken “very carefully” with a cost to residents of 5p per household per year.

Anthea Parkin, a Seaton resident, said: “I’m absolutely disgusted. It’s a total waste of our money and it’s wrong in this economic climate.”

The mayoral chain in Seaton is engraved with the name of the mayor and there is no room for more links on the current chain.

The town has a population of just over 7,000 and is known for its tramway and Jurassic coastline.

Seaton resident Bob Chapman said: “I think it’s disgusting when there’s lots of other things that could benefit from that sort of money being spent on it in the town.

“It’s just a little piece of chain. Why don’t they go to Pandora and buy one for about £200?”

Another resident who did not want to give their name said £8,000 would be better spent maintaining the town’s public toilets.

Two of the councillors on Seaton Town Council said they voted against spending more than £8,000 on the chain at the meeting in November.

Councillor Cheryl Wood said she had called for the existing chain to continue to be used with future mayor’s names added to a plaque in the council chamber.

Neil Dyke, also a councillor, said he had suggested keeping the chain as it is and arranging a public consultation.

The current mayor, Amrik Singh, was not available for interview and Seaton Town Council sent a statement.

It said: “The current chain of office is now full and the cost of preserving it and replacing it with a new chain of office that will last for a minimum of 48 years was considered by the nine councillors present.

“The cost worked out at 5p per household per year, which was considered reasonable in the circumstances and the longevity the replacement chain would provide.”

Ken Newland used to serve as a parish councillor in Berkshire before moving to Seaton about 20 years ago.

He sympathised with the town council and said a lot of the unpaid work they did went unrecognised.

He said: “They have to stand out in a crowd. You’re not going to want somebody turning up in a tracksuit and not looking like they have some gravitas about them

“The regalia is part of the role and the role is important to civic society.”

Kicking the can down the road – Owl

So-called capitalisation directions are risky and regarded as poor accounting practice, experts say

[Somerset Council to get access to £77 million and Plymouth City Council to £72 million.]

“It’s a huge relief to see 19 councils not going immediately bust. But it’s a very temporary solution that stands normal accountancy practice on its head to get us to the other side of a general election. But that’s all it does.”

Patrick Butler www.theguardian.com 

A record 19 councils in England have been handed multimillion-pound government bailout agreements totalling £2.5bn to prevent them collapsing into bankruptcy in the next few months, in a move likely to trigger a new round of public asset sales.

The Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities has agreed that the councils can take the highly unusual step of using funds raised by loans, or the sale of assets such as land and buildings, to plug holes in day-to-day revenue accounts.

The move, which follows an emergency £600m cash injection for all councils in January, is seen as a way of ministers minimising the prospect of further town hall insolvencies before the general election, rather than a solution to the wider crisis.

Rob Whiteman, chief executive of Cipfa, the public sector accountancy body, said: “It’s a huge relief to see 19 councils not going immediately bust. But it’s a very temporary solution that stands normal accountancy practice on its head to get us to the other side of a general election. But that’s all it does.”

The announcement comes after the latest dire predictions about English council finances. A survey report issued by the Local Government Information Unit on Wednesday estimated that 14 of England’s 372 councils would go bust in the next 12 months, as they collectively struggle with an estimated £4bn shortfall.

The agreements, known as capitalisation directions, are not grants or bailouts in the conventional sense of a cash injection but an arrangement that allows councils to bypass normal accounting rules to convert capital sums obtained by loans or selling assets into revenue.

Jonathan Carr-West, chief executive of the Local Government Information Unit, said the move was welcome but “we should not mistake this for generosity on the part of the government. They are simply allowing councils to borrow, and to sell their own assets.”

Birmingham council has already signalled that it intends to sell off up to £500m of as yet unidentified land, businesses and buildings from its £2.4bn asset portfolio, which includes the city’s central library, museum and art gallery, Aston Hall and the council’s stake in Birmingham airport.

Experts said capitalisation support is normally frowned upon as risky and short term, will not prevent cuts in council services, and is regarded as poor accounting practice. One told the Guardian: “It’s like you saying: ‘I’m selling my house to pay off my credit card bill.’ I’d say: ‘Are you sure you really want to do that?’”

Councils given exceptional financial support include Birmingham, Nottingham, Thurrock, Croydon, Slough, and Woking, all of which are in special measures after issuing formal section 114 declarations of bankruptcy in recent years.

Other councils in the list include Havering in east London, which had said that failure to get financial support would trigger immediate bankruptcy; and Somerset, which declared a “state of financial emergency” in autumn.

Strikingly, both North Northamptonshire and West Northamptonshire councils, created as supposedly more sustainable successors to Northamptonshire county council, which went bust in 2018, have been allowed to capitalise £10m between them to stave off effective bankruptcy.

The other councils are: Bradford, Cheshire East, Cumberland, Eastbourne, Medway, Middlesbrough, Plymouth, Southampton, and Stoke-on-Trent. It is unclear if any councils had been refused financial support by ministers.

Sir Stephen Houghton, chair of the Special Interest Group of Municipal Authorities, said: “This exceptional financial support will be welcome as a stopgap for those councils that have applied, but will not provide a long-term solution.”

(Anywhere but Exmouth – Owl)

A Devon MP is calling for the immediate halt of a controversial trial of a Low Traffic Neighbourhood (LTN) scheme in Exeter that has sparked a huge divide in the local community and is said to be impacting residents from far and wide. Simon Jupp, MP for East Devon, says that increased congestion is severely impacting those who use buses to get into the city and says it is ‘detrimental to sustainable public transport’.

Anita Merritt www.devonlive.com

The scheme – which has seen bollards and two bus gates introduced in Heavitree and Whipton – has been in place for six months. The public consultation is ongoing.

Mr Jupp has written to councillor Danny Barnes, chairman of the Exeter Highways and Traffic Orders Committee (HATOC), demanding that the trial be immediately scrapped. The scheme was originally agreed by that committee and implemented on its request by Devon County Council in August 2023. It aims to remove through-traffic from Heavitree and Whipton’s key residential areas to create a safer and more attractive environment for people walking, wheeling and cycling.

The current intention is for the consultation to run until May 8. Supporters of the scheme claim it has already achieved its aims, but opponents say it is having a huge negative impact on car journeys, traffic on already heavily congested roads, the environment, businesses and people’s lives.

Stagecoach has confirmed ‘highways capacity and congestion’ in Exeter have recently been impacting the punctuality and reliability of its services and it is ‘actively’ working to address them.

The letter, which has been shared on Mr Jupp’s Facebook page, states: “I write to you with deep concern and frustration shared by local residents over the impact the Heavitree and Whipton Low Traffic Neighbourhood (LTN) project is having on the Route 57 bus between Exmouth and Exeter.

“Many of my constituents in East Devon live and work along the Route 57 between Exmouth and Exeter. It is an incredibly popular service between two of the largest settlements in the county.

“That’s why I worked hard with Stagecoach South Wesy to get its 15-minute frequency reinstated last year. I am very worried about the detrimental impact the LTN is having on the reliability of this popular service which is harming passenger confidence and the sustainability of the frequency of the route.

“I have received numerous reports from constituents over an extended period of time that serious congestion on and around Heavitree Road caused by the LTN is leading to nearly 15-minute delays for Route 57 buses. This is totally unacceptable and must be put right.

“As chair of the Exeter Highways and Traffic Orders Committee (HATOC), the group responsible for how highway responsibilities are delivered in the city. I am urging you to take immediate action and scrap the LTN experiment in Heavitree and Whipton.

“The impact of the LTN is detrimental to sustainable public transport serving the city and surrounding areas, including my constituency. It is time to put the public first, not political ideology. I look forward to hearing from you on the steps you will take to address my concerns.”

Among those who commented on his post was a bus user who said: “All LTNs have done is cause chaos on the major roads into Exeter, especially Heavitree Road. It’s having a huge impact on all bus journeys, not just the 57.

“I’m a frequent user of the 4/44 and the service is so unreliable that often I can walk most of Heavitree faster than the traffic and without a bus even passing me but, unfortunately, I can’t walk all the way from the city centre to Cranbrook. The LTNs have done nothing but cause commuters stressful journeys and it’s time they were scrapped.”

Another added: “The boundary roads around the LTN are now regularly gridlocked with all the extra pollution and fuel costs to drivers. The other day, a bus journey through Heavitree that would normally take 10 minutes took nearly 40 minutes so you are quite right in pointing out the negative impact on public transport.”

The trial scheme has seen the installation of four physical modal filters – planters or bollards – to prevent access by all vehicles, and also four bus gates that can only be used by buses, emergency vehicles and certain other exempt classes of vehicle. Changes have been introduced in roads including Ladysmith Road, St Marks Avenue, Hamlin Lane, Whipton Lane and Vaughan Road.

A spokesperson for Stagecoach said: “We acknowledge and share the concerns around highways capacity and congestion in Exeter. Recent issues in the city particularly at peak travel times has regrettably impacted the punctuality and reliability of our services.

“We understand the frustration and inconvenience caused by these challenges and are actively working to address them. Our primary focus remains to serve the community getting residents and commuters where they need to go.”

Cllr Barnes and Devon County Council have been approached for a comment.

The Green Party has selected Henry Gent as its prospective parliamentary candidate for the new constituency of Honiton and Sidmouth.

Adam Manning www.sidmouthherald.co.uk 

The constituency also includes Ottery St Mary, Cullompton and Axminster.

Other candidates for this new constituency are sitting MPs Simon Jupp (Conservatives, East Devon) and Richard Foord (Liberal Democrats, Tiverton and Honiton).

Mr Gent has enjoyed being a member of Devon County Council since 2021, enabling him to campaign for local active travel routes and safer conditions for pedestrians across his division.

He has also been a member of Broadclyst Parish Council since 2010. Henry has run his family farm in East Devon for 40 years and is now handing on to the next generation.

Speaking on his appointment, Henry told the Herald: ”I have agreed to stand for parliament because people want the Green Party on the ballot paper, for a society fit for the transition to a low carbon sustainable future.”

Welcome to the broken shires, the legacy of 14 years of Tory austerity and cheese pairing. –  Owl

Nearly one in 10 councils in England have warned they will go bust in the next 12 months as authorities plan widespread cuts, above-inflation council tax rises and across-the-board increases to resident charges, a survey has revealed.

Patrick Butler www.theguardian.com 

The Local Government Information Unit (LGIU) annual poll of local authority leaders and top managers reveals a near-total collapse in confidence in the financial viability of councils as they grapple with “desperate” pressures and shrinking budgets.

It warns that council insolvencies – once extremely rare and triggered by unusual special factors such as the failure of commercial investments – should now be regarded as “normal occurrences” likely to hit even well run authorities.

The LGIU chief executive, Jonathan Carr-West, said: “This report, for the first time, demonstrates how widespread councils’ desperate funding situation is. That there is a structural funding issue is now impossible to deny.”

Eight English councils have declared themselves in effect bankrupt since 2018, including four in the past 15 months, including Woking, Nottingham, Birmingham and Thurrock. Several others have planned major cuts in an explicit attempt to stave off insolvency.

Earlier this month, a cross-party group of MPs said an emergency £4bn cash injection was needed to address an “out of control” financial crisis. In January, the government announced £600m in one-off emergency funding – widely regarded as an inadequate “sticking plaster” response by councils.

The survey lays bare what it calls a “dysfunctional” relationship between councils and Whitehall, with the vast majority (94%) of local authority leaders believing ministers have little understanding of the scale of the financial crisis facing councils.

Only 4% of council leaders felt confident about the sustainability of local government finance – down from 14% last year and 20% in 2020. One respondent described running the council as “a permanent state of crisis management”.

Another respondent said: “It feels the worst I’ve ever known it (even than when I started in the early 90s) with no prospect of change. Chief finance officer conferences feel more like group therapy nowadays.”

Survey findings include:

• Nine per cent of councils (14 authorities) surveyed reported they were “likely” to declare effective bankruptcy in the next 12 months, with more than half saying they would go bust in the next five years without extra funding.
• Rising need and costs in children’s services were the biggest drivers of financial instability in top-tier councils, with soaring homelessness bills the biggest risk factor for district councils.
• Nine out of 10 councils plan to raise council tax, with the same proportion proposing to introduce or raise charges for services like garden waste disposal and parking. Nearly two-thirds plan service reductions, “meaning that services are getting more expensive just as they are being cut”.

The survey is based on 160 responses from 128 councils in England (out of a total of 317) reflecting a broad cross-section of councils and geographical spread, and a mixture of political control.

A spokesperson for the Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities said: “We recognise councils are facing challenges and that is why we announced an additional £600m support package for councils across England, increasing their overall funding for the upcoming financial year to £64.7bn – a 7.5% increase in cash terms.

“This includes £500m of new funding for councils with responsibility for adult and children’s social care, distributed through the social care grant. Councils are responsible for their own finances and setting council tax levels, but we have been clear they should be mindful of cost-of living pressures while controlling any unnecessary or wasteful expenditures.”

To quote an impeccable/infamous Tory source from the last century: “No!….. No!……No!” – Owl

Thames Water has been lobbying the government and regulators to let it increase bills by 40%, pay lower fines for breaches and keep paying out dividends as part of efforts to avert a taxpayer bailout, according to a report.

Jack Simpson www.theguardian.com 

The UK’s largest water company was trying to strike a deal with the watchdog Ofwat that would give it permission to charge customers more to avoid having to be taken over by court-appointed special administrators, the Financial Times reported.

That plan would give Thames Water permission to increase bills by 40% by 2030, while also offering more leniency around regulator fines and rules around the dividends it can pay to shareholders.

It comes as the company, which serves more than 15m households, attempts to deal with a debt pile of £14bn and widespread criticism over sewage dumping.

If the government or Ofwat felt that Thames Water was unable to pay its debts it could apply to the high court to invoke the special administration process, in which administrators would be brought in to help manage the company.

Last week, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) updated 30-year-old legislation on the special administration regime, which would allow existing shareholders to retain a stake in the company and make it less likely that failing water companies could be fully renationalised.

According to the FT, officials at Defra have in place contingency plans for Thames Water if it collapses, under the name Project Timber. As part of this, it hopes Ofwat would allow “regulatory easements” on the issuing of hefty fines, which would put further pressure on the company.

In December, the parent company of Thames Water, Kemble Water Holdings, was told by auditors that it could run out of cash by April if shareholders did not inject more funds into the company.

The company has raised £500m and says shareholders would inject more than £3bn more – but this would be dependent on Thames Water getting what it wants from the regulator.

A crucial part of this is getting permission to issue dividends to services its debt. However, new rules introduced by the government last year can take enforcement action against water companies issuing dividends if they are performing badly against financial and environmental targets.

Thames Water has said investors will not take any money out of the business until the turnaround is completed but the rules do not distinguish between internal and external dividends.

Thames Water revealed this month that it expected more leaks than initially thought, after its ageing pipes were overwhelmed by heavy rain this winter.

An Ofwat spokesperson said: “Ofwat does not comment on speculation. Thames Water needs to continue to deliver on its turnaround plan to improve its operational and environmental performance. It is for the company to secure shareholder backing to improve its financial resilience. We will continue to closely monitor the company’s progress as they do so to protect customers’ interests.”

A government spokesperson said: “Water companies are commercial entities and we do not comment on the financial situation of specific companies as it would not be appropriate.

“We prepare for a range of scenarios across our regulated industries – including water – as any responsible government would.”

Thames Water declined to comment.

The technical article below explains why researchers from Reading believe the Environment Agency (EA) forecasting system that tells people whether it is safe to swim in bathing waters in England is not fit for purpose.

Before getting to the summary of the research, Owl, and Owl’s correspondents, have  long had additional concerns.

There is the dubious method, described below, of how the EA justifies discarding highly polluted readings when awarding coveted star ratings to beaches.

Another concern, put to Owl by correspondents in the past but  not discussed in this article, is whether the EA sampling is conducted where bathers actually swim.

Observation suggests not.

Jo Bateman, when interviewed on “This Morning” earlier this month, said that she first started swimming in the Exe estuary “Duck Pond” until she learned the significance of the “oily slick” that often appeared on the surface of the water.

Next door in Budleigh there are two brook outlets discharging onto the beach and the river Otter carrying whatever flows into it from Honiton and Ottery St Mary across the bay. How can the whole beach be given a single rating? Like Exmouth, there must be some sections more likely to suffer pollution than others. These problems are common to all our beaches.

Now to this opaque, but important “small print”, in the Environment Agency explanation of how bathing water quality is assessed:

 “At the bathing waters where PRF [Pollution Risk Forecasting] is possible, there is an agreement with local authorities for them to display warning signs at a bathing water when a pollution risk warning is issued. If one of these warnings is seen to be in place by our samplers when taking a sample and meets relevant criteria, then the sample may be disregarded from the set which is used to make the annual classification. This is done under the ‘Short Term Pollution’ provisions of the Regulations. This provision means that the classification reflects the water quality when advice against bathing wasn’t issued, and when people are likely to be using the water.“

Owl thinks this means: bathing water quality may be “excellent 3-star” except when it isn’t!

And remember the PRF warnings only operate during the summer, yet people swim all year round. Perhaps beaches should have a summer and winter quality rating.

Sea swimmers bathing in sewage without realising due to outdated warning system

Lucie Heath inews.co.uk

Swimmers are bathing in sewage in locations that they have been wrongly told are safe because of the Goverment’s “outdated” pollution warning system, i has been told.

Researchers from the University of Reading found that the system that tells people whether it is safe to swim in bathing waters in England relies on old weather forecasting technology and insufficient sample data.

Local councils are therefore only able to provide daily pollution warnings for around 40 per cent of the country’s 424 official bathing sites in the sea and rivers, the researchers said.

Even at these sites, swimmers are not always being warned when the water quality in beaches or rivers is unsafe. as the Government’s “outdated” system is not always able to predict high bacteria levels in the sea, the study found.

The Environment Agency (EA) operates a forecasting system designed to predict when England’s bathing waters are too polluted to swim in. Separate forecasting systems are in place in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

The system combines weather forecast data with historical water quality sample data to predict the level of E.coli in the water on a given day.

When the level of bacteria is above a certain threshold, the EA issues an alert to local beach managers, who are employed by councils and put up signs to warn people against entering the water.

But the study found that warnings are not always being deployed when they should be, due to failures with the watchdog’s forecasting system.

Lead author of the report Karolina Krupska, an environmental scientist, told i one of the main problems with the system is that it does not make use of the best rainfall forecast technology available.

Water companies often release untreated sewage from pipes into bathing waters during periods of heavy rain as their infrastructure becomes overwhelmed, meaning rainfall is often a good predictor of bacteria levels in the water.

Ms Krupska said the EA could incorporate more modern rainfall prediction methods into its forecast system. She said the watchdog has already done this for its flood prediction system but the bathing water system is “behind”.

As a result, she said the bathing water system is not good at predicting sudden intense rainstorms and therefore warning of the likelihood of increased bacteria levels in the water. She added that this is a particularly problem as this type of weather is expected more often in the UK as a result of climate change.

In some instances, this can result in the system issuing warnings for the wrong locations or not at all. For example, the system failed to issue alerts for a number of popular beaches in Cornwall, following heavy storms in the areas in the summer of 2021, Ms Krupska said.

“There was a mismatch over the warnings given and what actually happened on the ground. So no warnings were given around really popular beaches in Newquay,” she said.

The study also found that the forecasting system relies on limited sample data for each bathing spot. The EA samples the water quality at bathing spots 20 times per year on random dates, meaning the samples are often not taken during a pollution event.

Ms Krupska said this means the watchdog is unable to provide warnings for all spots in England “because the model is not accurate enough to provide any kind of useful forecast”.

In 2023, the EA was only able to provide forecasts for 172 (41 per cent) of the 424 designated bathing sites in England. The forecasts are only provided during the official bathing season, which runs from May until September.

Some water companies operate their own warning systems, which are separate to the forecaster published by the EA and issue alerts when they are dumping sewage into the sea and rivers.

A final problem identified by the study is that the EA only provides pollution forecasts once per day, typically around 8am.

Ms Krupska said this means swimmers are often not made aware of pollution that occurs in the afternoon.

“Water quality changes rapidly and to keep people safe you really need to have an almost real time dynamic warning system … we don’t have that information so if something happens in the meantime the people just won’t know about the pollution until they see it or smell it,” she said.

She added: “With existing pollution warning systems, beach users don’t have good enough information to decide whether it is safe to go in the water. The science underpinning the next generation of bathing forecasting already exists, but a lack of action means these solutions have not been implemented.”

Campaigners have been calling on the EA to introduce a better system for monitoring the quality of water at bathing sites.

Among them is the University of Reading rowers who train on the River Thames, which has suffered from pollution due to sewage and chemical pollution from motorways an agriculture.

An Environment Agency spokesperson said: “We know how important our bathing waters are to local communities. That is why we monitor water quality at more than 400 beaches and inland waters across England – with more than 7,000 water samples taken and analysed during last year’s bathing water season alone.

“We already use a range of monitoring programmes and data and welcome additional research on forecasting pollution in waters, especially those used for bathing.”

The rivers of Britain and Ireland are in a desperate state from the impact of pollution, with not a single waterway in England or Northern Ireland listed as being in good overall health, a report said on Monday.

Sandra Laville www.theguardian.com

The Rivers Trust annual State of Our Rivers report reveals that the impact of pollution from treated and untreated sewage and agricultural and industrial runoff means rivers are in a worse condition than ever.

More than half – 54% – of rivers in England failed to pass chemical and ecological tests because of pollution from water industry releases of treated and untreated sewage, based on data from the EU-derived water framework directive (WFD) in 2022.

Agricultural pollution contributes to 62% of waterways in England failing to meet good standards for chemical and biological pollution. Urban runoff from transport contributes to 26% of rivers not achieving good overall status.

The report shows none of England’s rivers are in good chemical health, which means the concentrations of toxic chemicals are higher than the safe limit in every river. Failing to pass chemical tests means no river in England is considered to be in good overall health.

Just 15% of rivers pass biological markers for good ecological health. Ecological health looks at what is living in the river, and how modified it is. The presence, absence and abundance of species is a good indication of its general health.

Similarly, no stretch of river in Northern Ireland is in good overall health.

The trust’s chief executive, Mark Lloyd, said: “The State of Our Rivers report is a huge passion project for us, as it’s so important to ensure that science and evidence are at the heart of conversations about how to improve our rivers.

“However, it’s also much more than that, as it puts the data in the hands of the public so that they can join us in calling for the change that our environment so desperately needs.”

The Rivers Trust is calling on the public to push politicians to make changes to improve the quality of rivers. Healthy waterways help to mitigate the effects of climate breakdown, support wider ecosystem biodiversity, and improve health and wellbeing for communities, the trust says.

The key pollution markers in the WFD are a globally recognised test of the quality of rivers. But the Conservative government has made it clear it is going to diverge from these EU standards of monitoring in future as a result of Brexit.

In 2019, the last time the full water assessments took place, just 14% of rivers were in good ecological health and none met standards for good chemical health. There had been little or no improvement since, according to the Rivers Trust report, with rivers in a desperate state.

“Even the clearest-looking waters can contain microplastics, industrial chemicals, hydrocarbons, fertilisers and pesticides, and even pharmaceuticals,” the new report said. “Untreated sewage spills blight most of our rivers, and even treated wastewater still contains a cocktail of chemicals like pharmaceuticals, pesticides from veterinary flea treatments, nutrients and household cleaning products when it is returned to our waterways …

“Our rivers are not healthy – far from it and things haven’t improved since our last report in 2021.”

The trust said worryingly, data was more patchy than in 2019 when it published its last report because river sampling by the Environment Agency had decreased.

“Nearly 6% fewer river stretches receiving health classifications compared to 2019,” the report said.

Chemical pollution from ubiquitous, persistent and bioaccumulative toxins was found everywhere, the report said.

“Chemicals can persist in freshwater habitats for decades, so despite the lack of testing this time around, we can reasonably expect the chemical health of our rivers to still be very poor,” it said. “Our analysis of government data showed that, despite being banned 15 years ago, levels of the toxic ‘forever’ chemical perfluorooctanesulfonic acid (PFOS) in freshwater fish in England is still found in concentrations on average over 300 times the levels deemed safe for aquatic life.”

The trust said more data was needed to truly understand the scale of the problems and deploy solutions to help rivers. But the government, since diverging from the WFD, has said it does not intend to publish results on river quality until 2025.

In England 85% of river stretches fall below good ecological standards and only 15% achieve good or above ecological health status.

Of the 3,553 river stretches the trust was able to gather data for, 151 had improved and moved up an ecological standard, but 158 had got worse.

The latest round of WFD assessments in 2021 revealed that 44% of Wales’s river stretches achieved at least good overall status. But Afonydd Cymru (Wales’s version of the Rivers Trust) has concerns about the way in which assessments for WFD are being carried out in Wales. It believes differences in waterbody status are more a reflection of differences in monitoring and reporting carried out by Natural Resources Wales, as opposed to any tangible environmental improvement.

In Scotland the proportion of river stretches assessed as being in good or better overall condition is now 57.2%, as found in Scottish Environmental Protection Agency classifications for 2022. This equates to an improvement in overall condition for 23 river stretches (to good status or better) since 2020.

In Ireland rivers are faring better with just over 50% of river water bodies achieving good or high ecological status. Ninety-four of the rivers in Ireland were not assessed for chemicals, but of the 193 that were surveyed, 60% failed and 40% passed standards.

A £1 billion home insulation scheme will take 60 years to meet its three-year target to help around 300,000 households, MPs have heard.

Richard Wheeler www.independent.co.uk 

The Government launched the Great British Insulation Scheme (GBIS) at the end of March 2023 to help people save money on their energy bills by making their homes more energy efficient.

But figures released this month show there have provisionally been 4,011 measures installed in 3,284 households up to the end of December last year.

For Labour, shadow climate minister Kerry McCarthy told the Commons: “The Great British Insulation Scheme is proving to be a great Tory insulation fiasco.”

Labour MP Kate Hollern (Blackburn) also said: “The Government’s latest energy efficiency policy – the Great British Insulation Scheme – was supposed to insulate 100,000 homes a year, but so far just 3,000 families have been helped in eight months; across Lancashire only 35 homes and in Blackburn only six.

“Can the minister explain why currently it will take 60 years to meet its three-year target?”

Energy minister Amanda Solloway replied: “Energy efficiency is incredibly important to this Government and in actual fact we have many schemes that are available.

“We have the Great British Insulation Scheme, which alone has committed £592 million.”

Paul Blomfield, Labour MP for Sheffield Central, added: “I hear what the minister has to say about the Great British Insulation Scheme – it comes after the Green Deal, it comes after the Green Homes grant but frankly it looks like another failure.

“There are 1.4 million people living in South Yorkshire but just 137 of their homes have been upgraded under GBIS.

“My constituents want their bills cut, they want to reduce emissions, they want homes insulated – what’s standing in the way is Government incompetence. When will the minister get a grip?”

Ms Solloway replied: “We’re spending £6 billion in this Parliament and a further £6 billion to 2028 on making buildings, including private rented properties, cleaner and warmer.

“This is in addition to the estimated £5 billion for the Eco4 and the GB Insulation Scheme up to March 2026.”

Labour MP Liz Twist (Blaydon) said just seven homes have been upgraded in Gateshead under the scheme as she questioned why there has been “such slow progress”.

Ms Solloway claimed the Government was making progress on insulating homes and pointed to schemes that are operating.

Elsewhere at energy security and net zero questions, Ms Solloway said “no decision” has been taken on the so-called “boiler tax” amid reports it is poised to be scrapped.

From April 2024, boiler manufacturers are expected to be required to match, or substitute, 4% of their boiler sales with heat pumps or face a £3,000 fine for each missed installation, rising to 6% in April 2025.

It comes as part of a Government target to help phase out gas boilers and deliver 600,000 eco-friendly heat pump installations a year by 2028.

Conservative former minister Dame Andrea Jenkyns said: “Talking of fuel poverty, the boiler tax results in consumers paying an extra £150 when they purchase a new boiler.

“Does the minister agree it’s now time to ditch these unworkable and unaffordable net-zero policies and let the British people decide how to heat their homes, what cars to drive and keep more of their own money?”

Ms Solloway replied: “No decision has been taken on this yet but we have a commitment to ensuring we do the very best deal to all of our constituents in this country.”

See companion post here

A major housing development should be blocked because underinvestment by Thames Water in the sewage system means it is unable to cope with the pressure of an increased population, the Environment Agency has warned.

Sandra Laville www.theguardian.com

Thames Water’s treatment plant in Oxford has been illegally discharging sewage for six years, causing significant risk to the rivers and environment from pollution, the EA has said.

The increased pressure on the sewage infrastructure from 1,450 new houses planned to the north of Oxford would pose an unacceptable risk of pollution into waterways, the agency said in a letter of objection.

It warned it was “not acceptable” for a new housing development to go ahead until Thames Water had carried out the required investment to bring the works within legal limits.

The revelations raise questions about the feasibility of the government’s housebuilding targets across the country with creaking infrastructure unable to handle existing levels of sewage.

Sewage treatment works in many areas are running at over capacity, and potentially illegally dumping sewage into rivers and seas. More than 2,000 treatment works run by several water companies are at the centre of a criminal investigation by the Environment Agency into illegal sewage dumping.

In a letter to the South Oxfordshire district council this month, the agency said the Oxford sewage treatment works, which deals with the waste from more than 200,000 people, has been running illegally in breach of its permit since 2017.

It objected strongly to the new development, which includes a primary school and new road system, saying the pressure on the sewage works would “pose an unacceptable risk of pollution to surface water quality”.

“Oxford Sewage Treatment Works is a site of significant concern” the EA said.

“In November 2021, the Environment Agency inspected Oxford STW, which led to Thames Water being issued with a compliance assessment report. Within this report, some serious and significant permit breaches were identified.

“While the site is noncompliant with its permit, the risk to the environment remains high.”

It went on to say as long ago as 2017 the treatment works was in breach of permit conditions.

Investment promised by Thames Water was supposed to bring the works up to standard by 2025, but the EA said: “This has been delayed by several years. The scheme and deadline are regulatory and legislative commitments, and failure to deliver it on time will potentially lead to further noncompliance at the site.

“It also presents a significant and ongoing risk to the receiving waterbody, particularly from continued and extended periods of storm overflows. Adding additional flows to the STW before this scheme is completed is not acceptable.”

As a result, the agency said it recommended that planning permission be refused.

Ash Smith, of Windrush against Sewage Pollution, welcomed the agency’s tough stance on the housebuilding. He said: “We are shocked and impressed to see the agency’s Thames region taking a long overdue stand against Thames Water polluting illegally for profit at Oxford.

“Is this a change in policy and a step towards sanity or will this outbreak of professionalism be stamped on by government to keep the shareholders happy?”

Thames Water had told the council there were no capacity issues with the treatment works that would impede the development of the 1,450 homes.

Jo Robb, a Green councillor on South Oxfordshire district council, said 5,000 new homes were planned in the area, all of which would connect to the Oxford treatment works, and this raised serious concerns.

“Time after time when there are major planning applications coming forward, Thames Water has consistently failed to identify capacity issues at its sewage treatment works,” she said.

“Now we see, in the strongest objection from the EA, that this treatment works has been operating illegally since 2017. So Thames Water absolutely cannot be trusted to identify capacity problems at its treatment works.”

There were major national implications regarding the need for new housing, Robb said.

“We have tens, possibly hundreds, of thousands of houses planned across the country which are going to be linked to treatment works that are not fit for purpose,” she said.

A Thames Water spokesperson said: “We work closely with developers and planning authorities across our region to ensure water and sewerage infrastructure can support growth, and where upgrades are needed to accommodate new developments, they will happen. We look at each development case by case and where needed will request conditions are added to planning applications, so for example, new homes are not occupied until the necessary upgrades to our infrastructure have taken place.

“We’re finalising plans for a major upgrade at Oxford sewage treatment works, costing more than £130m. This will provide a significant increase in treatment capacity, larger storm tanks and a higher quality of treated effluent going to the river.”