At last we have “the yeast that lifts the whole mattress of dough, the magic sauce – the ketchup of catch-up”, but does it cut the mustard? 

It has gone through many twists and turns in the Ministerial merry-go-round, through: Jenrick; Gove; Clark then back to Gove again. It amounts to 534 pages of legislation.

Secondary legislation is also required to flesh out some details. 

A future change of Government could also likely want to change things again.

So here is Civic Voice’s take on the new bill:

This substantial 534-page legislation serves as the cornerstone of the government’s ambitious levelling-up agenda, ushering in comprehensive changes to planning and plan-making procedures, reforming developer contributions, and enshrining the government’s “levelling up missions” in legal statute.

Michael Gove, the housing secretary, hailed the Act as a game-changer, emphasising its potential to bring about a plethora of positive transformations. These include providing more homes in communities across the country, initiating levelling-up efforts in disadvantaged areas, revitalising high streets and town centres, streamlining the planning system, ensuring developer accountability, and creating beautiful homes near essential amenities and eco-friendly enhancements. It all sounds almost too good to be true! The newly enacted Act introduces a suite of national development management policies with a broader impact on civic societies.

These policies address common planning considerations applicable across various authorities, such as the green belt and flood risk.

The Act streamlines the preparation, examination, and adoption process, reducing evidence requirements and aiming for plans to be adopted within 30 months. Notably, the duty to cooperate with neighbouring authorities to meet housing needs is removed. Amendments to the National Policy Planning Framework eliminate the requirement for a rolling five-year housing land supply when the local plan is current. Planning fees for major and minor applications can be increased by 35% and 25%, respectively, while councils gain the authority to consider slow build-out rates during planning approvals.

Furthermore, the Act mandates every local planning authority to create a design code for their area, which will integrate with local or supplementary plans. Additionally, it introduces ‘street vote’ powers, enabling residents on a street to propose property redevelopment aligned with their design preferences. Finally, the Act addresses planning enforcement matters.

Only time will reveal whether the Levelling Up idea truly levels up the country or further leaves certain regions behind.

Rishi Sunak’s government will use next week’s king’s speech to advance expansion of North Sea oil and gas exploration, as well as pro-car policies, in the hope of opening up a clear divide over the green agenda with Labour, the Observer understands.

Toby Helm www.theguardian.com 

Energy industry sources and senior figures in Whitehall say they expect ministers to announce legislation to usher in a new annual system for awarding oil and gas licences, despite the UK’s commitments to move away from fossil fuels and reach net zero carbon emissions by 2050.

The king’s speech, the final legislative programme before the next general election, is also expected to include measures that will explicitly favour motorists, including making it more difficult for local authorities to introduce 20mph speed limits or supposedly unpopular schemes such as the ultra-low emission zone (Ulez), recently expanded in London.

Laws to bring in tougher sentencing for serious crimes including rape, and moves to allow the government to rent prison space abroad to ease the current problems of overcrowding are also expected.

With his party lagging way behind Labour in the polls, Sunak announced a major U-turn on green policy in September, postponing the deadline for selling new petrol and diesel cars and the phasing out of gas boilers, prompting fury from the car and energy industries. He hoped to win over voters worried that green policies would add to the cost of living.

But since relaunching his premiership and axing the Birmingham to Manchester leg of HS2, the Tories have made no progress. In today’s Opinium poll for the Observer, they remain 15 points adrift of Keir Starmer’s party.

Despite this, Whitehall insiders and the energy industry say there are now clear signs that Sunak intends to double down in the hope that he can create “wedge issues” with Labour.

Labour suspects the king’s speech will be packed full of bills that will be there almost entirely for political reasons. One senior opposition figure said: “Many of these are not bills that are even necessary, nor does the government think they will ever come on to the statute book. They will be there because they want to be able to ask us: do you dare oppose this or not?”

Environmental campaigners point out that more oil and gas exploration licences are not only irresponsible, given the climate crisis, but that new laws are not needed to award more licences. This has been shown by the fact that the results of a new round of licences, launched just over a year ago during Liz Truss’s brief stint as PM, are due to be announced imminently.

The government argues that awarding more licences will enhance the UK’s energy security and reduce dependence on higher-emission imports, while protecting more than 200,000 jobs in a vital industry.

But the plans have been cast into doubt by new analysis that shows that 13 years of North Sea licensing under the Tories has led to the discovery of very small amounts of gas, the equivalent of just nine weeks’ worth of typical usage across the country.

New data from Uplift – an NGO that supports the transition from fossil fuel production – shows that hundreds of North Sea licences have been issued in six rounds since the Conservatives came to power in 2010. However, this has led to the discovery of only five new oil and gas fields and enabled a further seven previously discovered fields to be developed.

These 12 new fields contain just nine weeks of gas, but only half have begun producing. To date, just 16 days worth of gas has been produced from them since 2010. And half of this has been produced by the Sillimanite gas field, which is 30%-owned by Russian gas giant Gazprom, and has been exported to the Netherlands.

After five decades of drilling, the North Sea’s dwindling reserves, which are largely (70%) oil, mean significant new discoveries are unlikely.

Tessa Khan, executive director of Uplift, said: “Over the past 13 years under this government, new licences – hundreds of them – have led to a couple of months’ worth of new gas being discovered, and only just over a fortnight’s worth actually being produced.

“The Conservatives are selling us a pipe dream when they need to be straight with people about how we’re going to power this country. Rather than coming up with a coherent plan for ensuring we have a secure and, crucially, affordable power supply, they’re trying to score political points.

“An estimated 6 million households in this country now can’t afford to heat their homes in winter, and bills are likely to stay high for the rest of the decade. Does this government care, or is it more concerned with playing political games with energy policy?”

New data on water quality, to update the 2019 assessment,  is unlikely to be published before the election, indeed a complete update is not now planned until 2025. – Owl

The UK government is to diverge from the EU’s standards for monitoring water quality in England, it can be revealed.

Helena Horton www.theguardian.com

Campaigners fear the change of approach could lead to more pollution in England’s rivers and waterways if the new measuring methods are less rigorous.

While in the EU, England was covered by the water framework directive (WFD), which meant a national chemical and ecological survey of rivers was conducted annually. After Brexit, the WFD was transposed into English law but the government removed the requirement to conduct annual tests.

This is the latest example of the UK diverging from EU environmental standards. Recent analysis found that many toxic chemicals and pesticides banned in the bloc since Brexit are not outlawed for use in the UK. Ministers have also sought to rip up EU-derived sewage pollution rules for housebuilders.

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. The government has said it does not intend to deliver a complete update until 2025, the latest permissible date under the new WFD.

The Guardian can reveal that the government will be using its own, as yet undisclosed methodology to assess river health. Activists say this may make it harder to compare the state of the country’s rivers against those in the EU, and will leave the public in the dark over pollution from sewage and agriculture.

Government officials met stakeholders to tell them about the change. A source from an NGO present in the meeting said: “When asked how this would affect assessments against the target set out in the government’s environment improvement plan, officials commented that this data would no longer be used for that purpose, and that Defra were looking to use the Natural Capital and Ecosystem Assessment (NCEA) process to assessment performance. I question how developed the work on the NCEA is and whether this is suitable.”

A spokesperson for the Environment Agency confirmed to the Guardian that WFD data would no longer be used for the assessments. They said: “A pioneering partnership between Defra, Natural England, Environment Agency, Forest Research and the Joint Nature Conservation Committee, NCEA blends capability, expertise and experience to build a richer, more comprehensive picture of our natural environment, monitoring quality and quantity, assessing the impact of or need for interventions and helping to manage and protect our natural capital.”

It is now unlikely that any data revealing whether or not the situation has improved since the 2019 study published in 2020, that shamed the government by showing no English river was in good chemical condition, will be published before the next general election.

Stuart Singleton-White, of the Angling Trust, said: “WFD has been the bedrock of us understanding the state of our rivers, lakes and groundwater. It does not give a full picture, but it does provide a useful starting point. Past assessments have shown things are getting worse, not better. To now not have a full assessment in 2022 and have to wait to 2025 … simply sows confusion and leaves the public in the dark when it comes to properly understanding whether our rivers are getting better or worse.”

Government officials told the stakeholder meeting that in 2022 only a limited number of water bodies were assessed due to the Covid-19 pandemic and budget cuts. They told those present that they would use other monitoring data to keep their assessments of water quality on track, but that they would not use the limited 2022 assessments to extrapolate to a national picture as this risked creating a bias in the data. The 2022 data showed that the condition of the sites assessed had worsened.

The Liberal Democrats’ environment spokesperson, Tim Farron, said: “Instead of clamping down on sewage dumping, ministers have let water companies off the hook and scaled back assessments so we could know exactly how much damage has been done. It is frankly a disgrace. The whole system needs a complete overhaul. That means abolishing Ofwat and setting up a new regulator with real teeth and ensuring that testing is carried out regularly so we can get a full picture of the damage being done to our countryside.”

An Environment Agency spokesperson said: “Improving water quality is one of our highest priorities. We work through plans established under the water environment regulations to guide our permitting and enforcement. This work must be driven by a clear evidence base and we are working with partners to provide better information to enable this, including more real-time data. The next comprehensive update of classifications in all water bodies will be 2025. No significant changes to the classification methodology are planned – including changes to one out, all out. Every single water body will receive a classification.”

NHS bosses are using misleading figures to hide dangerously poor performance by A&E units in England against the four-hour treatment target, emergency department doctors claim.

Denis Campbell www.theguardian.com 

Some A&Es treat and admit, transfer or discharge as few as one in three patients within four hours, although the NHS constitution says they should deal with 95% of arrivals within that timeframe.

How well or poorly A&Es are doing in meeting the 95% target is not in the public domain because the data that NHS England publishes is for NHS trusts overall, not individual hospitals.

That means official figures are an aggregate of performance at sometimes two A&Es run by the same trust or include data for any walk-in centres, minor injuries units or urgent treatment centres that a trust also operates. Forty-eight trusts have two A&Es and many also run at least one of the latter.

The Royal College of Emergency Medicine (RCEM), which represents A&E doctors, wants that system scrapped. It is urging NHS England to start publishing data that shows the true performance of every individual emergency department against the 95% standard.

“The current data is misleading,” Dr Adrian Boyle, the college’s president, told the Guardian. “It’s a good example of a lack of transparency and also of performance incentives. Being open about the long delays in some A&Es would shine a light in some dark places.”

Walk-in centre-type settings have much better performance against the four-hour target. That is because, although they also provide urgent and emergency care, most patients who use them have minor ailments and are quicker to treat, whereas those attending hospital-based A&Es are more seriously unwell and take longer to treat and discharge or find a bed for.

Boyle said the current system was flawed because it meant hospital leaders may be tempted to focus on improving four-hour performance in places such as walk-in centres, as high marks there may help to mask what were often low scores in hospital A&E units.

“The problem with the current data is that it encourages hospital managers to chase down the quick wins – to focus on low-acuity patients, such as people with a sprained ankle or cut finger, while neglecting the patients who are waiting on trolleys [in A&E] for admission to hospital,” he said.

NHS England collects but does not publish site-level data. But its practice of combining performance figures from A&Es and other settings “provides a figleaf and a smokescreen that hides poor performance and real harm that’s being done to patients through them having long stays in A&E,” Boyle added.

Earlier this month the Health Service Journal acquired and published site-level data for every individual A&E in England. It showed that between April and June this year Pilgrim hospital in Boston, Lincolnshire, managed to deal with only 33% of patients within four hours, the lowest proportion in the country. However, the performance of the United Lincolnshire Hospitals trust that runs it was much higher, at 45.3%.

Similarly, North West Anglia trust’s overall 56.3% performance disguised the fact that the A&E at its Peterborough city hospital site scored just 38.1%.

Publishing figures for each individual hospital would improve patient safety, Boyle said. “We know that there’s an increased risk of mortality once someone has spent more than six hours in A&E waiting for a bed. Our efforts must be to prioritise the sickest, the oldest and the most vulnerable patients, to reduce the risk of them dying. Our system as it is currently designed is making sick people more sick.”

Boyle said Steve Barclay, the health secretary, fully supported the RCEM’s call for greater transparency around A&E data. The Department of Health and Social Care did not respond when asked about the minister’s view.

NHS England said it would continue publishing aggregated data for trusts. A spokesperson said: “Data is published at the level of accountability – in this case trusts, which use site data to identify and tackle variation.

“As part of a national support package and measures in the urgent and emergency care recovery plan, the NHS offers on the ground tailored support at both site and trust level through tiered interventions and sharing good practice, which reduces variation both within and across systems.”

Britain’s most senior civil servant called Boris Johnson “mad and dangerous” and compared him to Donald Trump during the Covid-19 pandemic, it has been claimed.

Hugo Gye, Arj Singh inews.co.uk

Simon Case, the Cabinet Secretary, allegedly sent the message in summer 2020 when the then-Prime Minister was seeking to end all social distancing rules.

The WhatsApp message to colleagues is expected to be published in the coming days as the official Covid inquiry resumes its evidence sessions, The Times reported.

In it Mr Case apparently said that the idea of ending the pandemic rules when coronavirus infections were increasing was “Trump Bolsonaro level mad and dangerous” – a reference to the leaders of the US and Brazil, who both sought to downplay the danger posed by the pandemic.

The Government ended up allowing most businesses to reopen and weakening social distancing guidelines, but later had to reverse course and impose two more lockdowns as pressure on hospitals continued to grow.

Among those giving evidence to the inquiry next week are former No 10 chief of staff Dominic Cummings, communications director Lee Cain and Mr Johnson’s former principal private secretary Martin Reynolds, who acquired the nickname “Party Marty” during the scandal over lockdown-breaking gatherings in Downing Street.

Mr Reynolds will appear on Monday morning followed by Mr Cain in the afternoon, with Mr Cummings giving evidence on Tuesday morning.

Other notable figures appearing next week include former deputy Cabinet Secretary Helen MacNamara, ex-permanent secretary of the Department of Health and Social Care Sir Christopher Wormald and former NHS chief executive Baron Stevens of Birmingham.

Module two of the inquiry is focused on decision-making and political governance at the heart of the Government.

So we can expect questions about some of the biggest policy decisions and how they were made, including particularly when and how the Government decided to impose lockdowns – which has been a key focus of the inquiry so far.

Mr Cummings has in the past given scathing evidence in this area, infamously bemoaning the fact there are “no ninjas” and “no door” to a “quiet calm centre” in No 10 where there are officials “who actually know what they are doing”.

Former Chancellor George Osborne has claimed that Mr Cummings and Mr Johnson sent “disgusting and misogynistic” WhatsApp messages that will be released by the inquiry next week.

WhatsApp correspondence in which Mr Case refers to Mr Johnson’s wife Carrie as “the real person in charge” and said the Government was a “terrible, tragic joke” in a group including Mr Cummings and Mr Cain have already been published.

It emerged last week that the Government’s current chief scientific adviser Dame Angela Maclean referred to the Prime Minister as “Dr Death the chancellor” over the then-chancellor’s Eat Out to Help Out scheme, when the Professor was an adviser to the Ministry of Defence.

Mr Cummings and Mr Cain have also previously criticised Mr Sunak’s claims that he was stopped from talking about “trade-offs” when the Government was deciding to impose lockdowns, meaning the Prime Minister’s conduct could come up.

As Chancellor at the time, Mr Sunak was also at the heart of Government decision-making and there could be revelations about his role from a number of witnesses.

Richard Foord has secured an Adjournment Debate early in the new parliament.

These last half an hour and provide an opportunity for an individual backbench MP to raise an issue and receive a response from the relevant Minister.

Monday, 13 November 2023: Upcoming business  www.theyworkforyou.com

Commons: Main Chamber

• Debate on the Address
• Seaton Community Hospital – Richard Foord Adjournment debate

“I’ve had to choose to prioritise and I can assure you, species reintroduction ain’t one of my top priorities and therefore we’ve stepped back away from that,” Thérèse Coffey  told the committee on Tuesday. “Ultimately we have a broader range of activities and we have to choose where we can put our resources.” (Source BBC) [See: Are our beavers under threat from Therese Coffey?]

committees.parliament.uk 

The Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee today publishes the Government’s response to its report on Species Reintroduction, in which MPs considered Defra’s approach to the ongoing and often contentious reintroduction of species such as beavers, eagles and bison. The Committee drew attention to the potential benefits that species reintroduction could offer but noted that reintroductions require careful long-term plans to identify and manage potential adverse effects on local communities and other land users.

• Read the full report (HTML)
• Read the full report (PDF)
• Find all publications related to this inquiry, including oral and written evidence
• Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee

MPs called for the Government to produce a list of priority species for reintroduction

In their report, published in July, the EFRA Committee cited that species reintroduction could help government to meet its biodiversity and species abundance goals and could benefit local communities, restore ecosystems and secure the future of organisms in the wild. The Committee made a series of detailed recommendations on the Government adopting a long-term strategic vision on species reintroduction. MPs called for the Government to produce a list of priority species for reintroduction.

It also noted, however, that species reintroduction can be controversial and can carry the risk of potential adverse effects on local communities, as in the case of beaver reintroduction. The EFRA Committee’s report recommended categorising species according to levels of risk to stakeholders, (low, medium or high) and emphasized the importance of a pre-reintroduction management plan for each species.

Species reintroduction not a Government priority

In its response to the report, DEFRA states that ‘the reintroduction of species is not a priority for the government’ and that the Government aims to reach its biodiversity targets through other methods including habitat restoration and biodiversity corridors. DEFRA says it will not be producing a strategy or a list of priority species for reintroduction and referred instead to the Government’s Code for Reintroductions. To the proposal of a three-tiered list of risk levels, DEFRA disagreed, responding that the level of risk from any species is dependent upon local circumstances.

EFRA’s report recommended that a Species Reintroduction Strategy by Government should include budgetary provision to support farmers and landowners in case of adverse effects of reintroduction. Responding to EFRA’s proposal, the Government stated that the primary mechanism for Government funding for farmers would be through ELMS (environment land management schemes).

Chair’s comment

Sir Robert Goodwill, Chair of the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee said:

“The Government has said that species reintroductions are not a priority and so it will not produce a strategy for managing them. This is despite the fact that reintroductions are currently taking place in the UK and raising concerns in farming and rural communities, particularly in relation to increased flooding risks arising from beaver reintroductions.

The Government have in the past played a role in supporting the reintroduction of lost native species, including the red kite and pool frog. However, given the important potential benefits of species reintroduction and considering the Government’s own targets on biodiversity, it is concerning that they do not have a plan on species reintroduction and disappointing that they have not responded positively to our report and taken more steps to manage the reintroductions taking place as we speak.”

Rishi Sunak will miss his key pledge to cut NHS waiting lists as a new analysis shows the backlog is set to hit a record 8 million by next summer – regardless of further strikes.

Rebecca Thomas www.independent.co.uk

The number of patients waiting for an operation or appointment will peak at an all-time high by August 2024 – up from 7.75 million this August, according to the Health Foundation think tank.

The analysis will come as a blow to the prime minister who has so far failed to meet promises he made in January 2023 to cut the backlog and get people treated more quickly by March 2024.

The latest figures show 500,000 more people are waiting to be seen since he made the pledge.

Wes Streeting, Labour’s Shadow Health Secretary, said the report “blows out of the water the Conservatives’ attempts to blame doctors and nurses for the crisis in the NHS”.

“Rishi Sunak’s failure to stop the strikes has only made a terrible situation worse, leaving even more patients waiting in pain and discomfort, unable to live their lives to the full,” he added.

The Health Foundation’s predictions, calculated by measuring new monthly surgery and appointment referrals against completed treatments, found the NHS waiting list has been steadily rising for the past decade. And efforts to tackle the backlog could be further hampered by a new wave of Covid or bad winter flu season or hospitals having to cut back care as a result of financial pressures, it added.

Charles Tallack, director of data analytics at the Health Foundation, said: “Ministers have been quick to blame industrial action for the lack of progress in reducing the waiting list but the roots of this crisis lie in a decade of underinvestment in the NHS, a failure to address chronic staff shortages and the longstanding neglect of social care. The pandemic heaped further significant pressure on an already stressed system but waiting lists were already growing long before Covid.”

“Eliminating the backlog for elective care and returning waiting times to 18 weeks is entirely possible – it was done in the early 2000s and it can be done again. However, it will be very challenging and will require sustained focus, policy action and investment.”

The report warned that ongoing junior doctors’ strikes could cause the waiting list to increase after August 2024 by 180,000. It also said they would have indirect impacts on services such as “squeezing NHS finances and diverting management attention away from productivity improvement”.

So far, strike action by junior doctors, which started in March, and action by consultants which started in July, has increased the waiting list by 210,000 people – 3 per cent – according to the analysis.

Responding to the report, Tim Mitchell, president of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, said waiting lists had “ballooned” in the past decade due to “underinvestment and workforce shortages” – pressures which were compounded by the pandemic.

“While industrial action has contributed to delays, the roots of this crisis precede the strikes,” he said.

Matthew Taylor, chief executive of the NHS Confederation, which represents health services across England said: “With the elective waiting list increasing by around 100,000 a month, NHS finances already hit to the tune of £1.4bn and nearly 1.2 million people experiencing a cancelled operation as a result of industrial action, it’s in everyone’s interest to bring the strikes to an end. If not, we are facing a waiting list of over 8 million next year.”

“As the Health Foundation report rightly says, the root cause of the delays to treatment that patients are now experiencing is a decade of under-investment in the NHS.”

Representatives from the British Medical Association and the government met last week after months of stalemate over the strikes.

BMA chair, Prof Phil Banfield, said: “For months we have been hearing ministers blame strikes for the length of the elective waiting lists, which are now nearing 8 million. While there is no doubt that industrial action has had an effect on the ability to reduce waiting lists – something that could have been avoided entirely if the government had come to the table willing to listen to doctors in the first place – it pales in comparison with a decade of failure of policy on the NHS from the top

“This should be a ‘carpe diem’ moment for the PM and chancellor. They must seize the moment to demonstrate they are planning and investing for the long-term future of the UK. I appeal directly to them to unblock the obstacles that stop us getting on with treating patients. It is up to them.”

The Department of Health and Social Care has been approached for comment.

Two of Torbay’s Conservative councilors have resigned from the ruling Tory group.

The two rebel councillors are also calling on the Tory administration to focus on supporting local High Streets and tackling the problems of homelessness and housing.

“There’s a lot of good stuff going on in Torbay with devolution and big capital projects lining up, but if history has taught us anything it’s that the devil is in the detail, and we would encourage the administration to be focused on that too.

“We want to be free to challenge projects while they’re still being formulated so we can avoid the fiascos of the past.”

Guy Henderson, local democracy reporter www.radioexe.co.uk

Katya Maddison (Shiphay) and Patrick Joyce (Wellswood) were elected as Conservatives in the local council polls in May, but have now decided to form a new group called Prosper Torbay.

They claim they will be better able to serve the interests of Torbay residents by being outside the Conservative group.

The change shifts the balance of power on Torbay Council significantly. Up until today there were 19 Conservative councillors, 15 Liberal Democrats and two Independents, giving the Tories an overall majority of two.

However, with 17 Conservatives, 15 Liberal Democrats, two Independents and two Prosper Torbay councillors, the overall majority is gone.

The two rebel councillors are also calling on the Tory administration to focus on supporting local High Streets and tackling the problems of homelessness and housing.

In a statement they said: “There’s a lot of good stuff going on in Torbay with devolution and big capital projects lining up, but if history has taught us anything it’s that the devil is in the detail, and we would encourage the administration to be focused on that too.

“We want to be free to challenge projects while they’re still being formulated so we can avoid the fiascos of the past.”

The two councillors say there are old issues which aren’t going to be solved by building projects.

Their statement goes on: “To get the best result from all this investment a response to anti-social behaviour must be baked into the programme.

“Our high street businesses are fragile. We’ve worked hard to understand some of their challenges and would like to see effective measures being taken by a council listening and adapting and supporting our communities.

“Particularly at this time of economic challenge we could be developing new thinking to help them respond to the pressures they are facing.”

Cllr Maddison says she believes better information flows and transparency are things the council could improve to the benefit of residents and businesses, while Cllr Joyce says he believes new ideas are needed if the issues of homelessness and housing are to be addressed.

“We will continue to strive for a council focused on improvement,” the statement goes on.

“What lies ahead of us is so exciting, but we must link investment with the other crucial changes that will make the difference, and that doesn’t happen unless there are people actively pushing for them.

“Our purpose is working for all residents of Torbay who are at the heart of everything we look to do and achieve, and we continue as ward councillors to serve our communities in very difficult and uncertain times.”

New homes agreed for a village near Ottery St Mary has prompted opposition from some residents despite half being turned over as affordable properties.  

A bid by West Hill’s residents to block 30 new homes being built has failed after planners approved the proposals, writes local democracy reporter Bradley Gerrard. eastdevonnews.co.uk

The village near Ottery St Mary witnessed an outpouring of opposition to the Blue Cedar Homes scheme because of the potential impact on the local environment and stretched public services,

East Devon District Council’s (EDDC) planning committee this week heard that West Hill Parish Council feared the pressure the scheme’s additional residents would put on local schools, GP surgeries and other services.

“We ask where will the children go to school given that West Hill Primary School and King’s School [in Ottery St Mary]are oversubscribed, where will householders access healthcare as GP services in Ottery are overstretched, and dentists in both West Hill and Ottery are not taking new patients,” a statement from the parish said

“Where will householders work as there are no employment opportunities in the village, and where will the children play and enjoy sport given the serious lack of public open space for recreation in West Hill?”

The parish added that the open space proposed as part of the application, which is split over two plots near Eastfield and would feature 50 per cent affordable homes, would not be adequate to address the shortage of space for children in the village to play.

Marion Tate, a resident of Eastfield Gardens, which will neighbour the development, told the East Devon planning meeting she supported the raft of objections made by fellow residents.

“I have major concerns over the disruption that would be caused during construction, parking will be a huge issue with heavy vehicles and all the tradespeople, materials and contractors necessary for the build,” she said.

“Two points of access to the eastern plot will not be able to cope, these roads have no pavements and the disruption will affect the residents at Hawthorne Close and Eastfield Gardens.”

Ms Tate’s comments came on top of objections from 35 residents who attended a West Hill Parish Council meeting earlier in the year to speak against the application.

Councillors there called the public turnout at one of their meetings “unusual” and suggested it “demonstrated the importance of the issue to residents”.

Councillor Jess Bailey (Ind, West Hill & Aylesbeare) questioned how sustainable the site was in terms of its links to public transport, and said future occupants would be “heavily car dependent”.

She cited a 2011 report that questioned how potential residents on a site in the same location as the Blue Cedar scheme could use or access sustainable means of transport.

“The inspector stated that other than the shop and the primary school, there were few other facilities within convenient walking distance,” she said.

“And with the closest bus stop roughly 1.5km away, this will discourage bus use, while the frequency and timings of services to Exeter and Honiton are such that it is unlikely to be an attractive option for many people.

“I believe it’s wrong that a site that was deemed unsustainable in 2011 is now deemed sustainable.”

Des Dunlop of D2 Planning, the developer’s agent, said it was “worth noting that this site has been identified for residential development in the emerging draft local plan.”

“The applicant has worked diligently with officers and statutory consultees prior to submission and during its determination, and the detailed assessment of the proposal by officers shows no objections from statutory consultees in regards to highways, flooding, landscape, ecology or impact on local services,” he said.

Mr Dunlop added that while some residents had expressed concerns about increased flooding risks in the area due to the development, he said the drainage system that would be put in place would mean water run-off rates would be lower than if the site remained undeveloped.

Following its debate, the planning committee opted to approve the scheme, but with conditions including for a footpath to be built connecting to adjacent land that could be developed in the future.

Mr Dunlop queried this stipulation, claiming it was pre-empting a decision on another site that had not yet appeared before the planning committee, but said his client “had no objection in principle” to providing the requested footpath.

The cause of a huge blaze that destroyed a derelict hotel on the outskirts of Seaton remains “unknown” though police are treating the incident as arson. Fire crews were still at the scene in the Harepath Hill area until 7pm last night (October 24).

Elliot Ball www.devonlive.com

Reports of the fire first emerged at around 4.19pm on Monday (October 23) and a road closure was immediately put in place. Multiple fire engines rushed to the scene as crews continued to battle the flames for more than 24 hours.

In a fresh update issued to DevonLive, a spokesperson for Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue said the cause of the blaze was still “unknown” and would be determined at a later date once a fire investigation was completed. A spokesperson for Devon and Cornwall Police added that officers were investigating the “suspicious fire” and were appealing for anyone with any information to come forward.

A Devon and Somerset Fire and Rescue Service spokesperson said: “Currently the cause of the fire is unknown and will be determined by the fire investigation. One crew remained on scene yesterday until 7pm last night damping down potential hotspots.”

A spokesperson for Devon and Cornwall Police added: “Police are investigating a suspicious fire within an abandoned building in Seaton on 23 October. Officers were called at 4.50pm by the fire service who were tackling the fire at the former Seaton Heights Hotel on Harepath Hill.

“The building sustained serious damage. No injuries were reported. The A3052 was closed in both directions for several hours between Harepath Hill and Seaton Down Hill.

“Police are treating the incident as arson and appealing to anyone who saw or heard anything suspicious in the area at the time to contact them online or by telephone on 101, quoting crime reference 50230282022.”

Pictures were able to capture the moment flames and smoke billowed from the former holiday camp, Seaton Heights. New pictures show the devastation of the blaze which destroyed the abandoned building.

While part of the structure is still standing, much of the building has been destroyed in the flames. Once a popular holiday resort, the hotel complex has been left empty and dilapidated since its closure in 2005.

In May 2015, permission was granted for the construction of a 12-bedroom hotel, 38 holiday units and a restaurant and leisure complex – but the scheme never got under way.

The former Seaton Heights hotel and apartments boast stunning views over the East Devon Jurassic coast and has long been earmarked for development. But the derelict site has been the subject of several planning applications, all of which have been refused, withdrawn or fallen through after received permission.

Read more about Seaton Heights here.

A neighbour clash in East Devon has resulted in the district council being urged to step in, ‘use its teeth’, and help sort out a debt dispute between Colyton and Colyford.

The chair of newly-formed Colyford Parish Council has urged the district council to “use its teeth” in an ongoing spat with neighbouring Colyton, writes local democracy reporter Bradley Gerrard.

Local Democracy Reporter eastdevonnews.co.uk

Ian Priestley, chair of the parish that was legally established in April, addressed East Devon District Council’s (EDDC) cabinet meeting to plea for assistance in its ongoing dispute with Colyton.

A reorganisation order compelled Colyton to pay Colyford £11,202 for highways safety projects and advance rental income when the new parish council was formed, but Mr Priestley said the money still hadn’t been paid.

Colyton Parish Council submitted a legal challenge about the process that led to the creation of Colyford and the conditions linked to it, but its claim for a judicial review is yet to be decided by a court.

“Cabinet, you have teeth, can you please use them,” Mr Priestley pleaded with East Devon councillors.

“EDDC should be pulling out all the stops to assist a new council, not putting us into a position of potential failure.”

Mr Priestley added that Colyton had “voted to resist” the reorganisation order, which was issued by East Devon District Council and approved by the secretary of state for communities and local government.

Minutes from a meeting of Colyton Parish Council on Monday, September 11 acknowledge that advice given to the council by third parties suggested the reorganisation order “should be followed until a court order reverses it”.

It added that rental income in relation to Stafford Cross, which was transferred to Colyford as part of the reorganisation, should be paid to the new parish.

“[But] the council is still waiting to hear back from the courts regarding the potential judicial review,” the minutes of Colyton’s meeting said.

The minutes added that the chairman would “pen a letter to EDDC stating that Colyton do not believe that the money should go to Colyford whilst there is a legal challenge”, but if a judicial review went in Colyford’s favour, then Colyton would transfer the money.

Mr Priestley asked East Devon to pay Colyford the £11,202 it was owed, and seek to recoup that money itself from Colyton, rather than Colyford receiving funds from EDDC in advance.

“Another advance of our precept would just see us chasing our tails for the foreseeable future,” Mr Priestley added.

Mr Priestley noted that rent for Stafford Cross had now been paid to it by tenants on the land, but that the reduced sum it received from EDDC when the new parish was being set up – £750 compared to a previously discussed £5,000 – meant its resources were tight.

Councillor Sarah Jackson (Independent, Axminster) promised to convene a meeting with Mr Priestley and Melanie Wellman, EDDC’s monitoring officer.

“I am disappointed the reorganisation order has not been complied with and we have not heard back yet from the courts in relation to a judicial review,” she said.

East Devon council leader Paul Arnott had passed his responsibility for chairing the cabinet meeting for this discussion because of a conflict of interest, notably his position on Colyton Parish Council.

He said he “did not agree” with the position being taken by Colyton, and was “extremely concerned” about the logjam in the court system, which could mean a lengthy wait before a judicial review was completed.

“I have genuinely considered whether I should resign from Colyton to serve Colyford, but I think some people in Colyton might find that desirable, so I’m not going to,” he said.

A spokesperson for Colyton Parish Council said the parish could not comment because of the forthcoming judicial review.

Migrants leave Exmouth hotel bound for the Bibby Stockholm

A coach was spotted outside a hotel in Exmouth on Thursday, (October 19), collecting the first migrants to arrive on the controversial Bibby Stockholm.

Adam Manning and Ben Williams www.exmouthjournal.co.uk 

Pictures, seen by the Journal, which we have decided not to publish to protect the identities of the people on the bus, show migrants leaving a hotel in the town. They are believed to be the first people back on board the ship since it was evacuated on August.

The boat had to be emptied because traces of Legionella bacteria were found in the water supply.

The boat has been controversial because it has been used by the government as a way to accommodate asylum seekers coming to the UK on small boats.

Protesters against the use of the vessel, which they describe as “inhumane” and “like a prison”, gathered at the gates of Portland Port in Dorset as a coach carrying the group arrived on Thursday.

The coach carrying the asylum seekers had been stopped by Just Stop Oil protesters earlier on its approach to Portland in a “positive protest” in support of the campaign against the use of the barge.

Dorset Police confirmed that two people had been arrested on suspicion of criminal damage to the coach after they received a report that it had been damaged as it was stopped in the protest in Portland Beach Road.

A force spokeswoman said that a third person was also arrested on suspicion of criminal damage to a police vehicle.

Candy Udwin, of Stand Up To Racism Dorset, said after the coach entered the port: “It is a terrible way to treat people but we have sent a message today that they are welcome and this is not the way to treat refugees.”

She said she had been in contact with some of those who had been staying on the Bibby Stockholm, adding: “They hate it, they say it feels like a prison, some hate being on the sea, they find it very difficult to leave and they are completely separated from the community.”

A Home Office spokesman said that tests for the bacteria as well as improved fire safety protocols had been completed ahead of the return of the occupants to the barge.

Richard Foord Liberal Democrat Spokesperson (Defence)

The SEND crisis extends to Devon, and my postbag is full of correspondence from parents trying to get their children the educational provision they need. It has got so bad that in some cases children are being taught in school cupboards, and Devon has appointed a SEND champion to its cabinet. What steps is the Department taking to help boost SEND services in rural areas such as mine?

David Johnston The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Education

There has been a 30% increase in the per-head funding to schools in Devon for their special educational needs provision, and the whole thrust of our reform plan is to make the system work better for parents and families and get the support for their children at the stage when they need it.

So, what exactly is this “30% increase” (meaningless without quoting any baseline)?

John Hart, DCC Leader, didn’t mention it in an article he wrote a few weeks ago. In fact he says Devon is amongst the 42 worst funded councils in the country (see below).

In August the Government announced more support for children with special educational needs, backed by funding of £70m.

“Over a thousand more children and young people with SEND are set to benefit from access to high-quality specialised learning, with seven new special free schools in Cambridgeshire, Kent, Merton and Norfolk selected to be built alongside the existing 83 already committed to opening, located across England from Devon to Darlington.”

The detailed lists of which councils get the money can be found on this site: Revealed: Councils chosen to lead local SEND inclusion plans.

Devon and Cornwall appear to be excluded.

It received one comment from Kevin Hilton which says it all:

So Devon and Cornwall don’t have a requirement for SEND provision? It seems that this part of the ‘South West’ is constantly overlooked or forgotten. I find this a bitter pill as these counties are more the South West than Swindon and Gloucester who already have better transport links to reach other counties.

Did you know that getting from West Cornwall to the nearest major motorway (The M5) is a 100+ mile journey and as nice as West coast trains are they are not an affordable option for the majority of families in Cornwall.

When will the decision makers start to consider the needs of those of us who live and work in the most deprived county in the country? 

Meanwhile, Devon County Council in “Special Measures” is struggling.

See: We’re bottom of the class, John Hart on education funding.

Now John Hart has had to augment the efforts of Cllr Andrew Leadbetter (Wearside & Topsham),  Cabinet Member for Children’s Services and Schools, with an additional Cabinet member acting as a dedicated Champion for Special Needs Education, Lois Samuel.

Roll on the County Council elections, it’s time for a change. This administration is obviously tired and failing. – Owl

“The UK already has more millionaire bankers than the whole of the EU put together yet our economy is stagnant and our public services are in crisis.” Director, High Pay Centre.

Fizzy Liz and many Tories still believe in the magic of “trickle down economics”. Do you? – Owl

Cap on bankers’ bonuses scrapped as UK brings back Liz Truss policy

THE UK Government has revived a policy from the short-lived Liz Truss administration and will scrap the cap on bankers’ bonuses.

Xander Elliards www.thenational.scot

The Financial Times reported that the Tories would imminently ditch the rule which limits banker bonuses to double their annual salary.

The EU rule will be scrapped in an effort to improve the attractiveness of London post-Brexit, FT said, in reasoning which reflects words from Kwasi Kwarteng during his brief time as chancellor.

The new rules will come into effect from October 31, the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) said.

The news has been greeted with anger, with Green MP Caroline Lucas saying it showed the UK Government’s true priorities.

“In case you were wondering what this Govt’s priorities were, look no further,” Lucas wrote.

“Ministers are now planning to scrap the EU cap on bankers’ bonuses.

“More money for city fatcats in the middle of a cost of living scandal – post-Brexit Britain in a nutshell.”

Economist Professor Richard Murphy also commented: “As if evidence was required that Tory UK is run for the benefit of bankers …”

When the cap on bankers’ bonuses was put forward by the Truss government, Labour leader Keir Starmer (below) opposed the decision.

He told the Mirror in September 2022: “Removing the cap on bankers’ bonuses when people are really struggling to pay their bills shows the Tories are absolutely tone deaf to what so many people are going through.”

Starmer had previously claimed the policy amounted to “pay rises for bankers, pay cuts for district nurses”.

Since then however, Labour have embarked on a mission to charm the City of London’s bankers ahead of the next General Election and it remains to be seen if Starmer will continue to oppose the move.

The FCA stated: “The bonus cap does not limit total remuneration but limits the variable remuneration a firm can pay relative to an individual’s fixed pay.

“This has the effect of limiting the proportion of remuneration that can be adjusted by risk and performance measures.”

Richard Foord’s speech at Monday’s Westminster Hall debate on Honesty in Politics, and the damage dishonesty is doing to democracy, has reached the national news.

Has Simon Jupp ever put his head above the parapet on a matter of principle?

Of course, this government is going to do nothing. – Owl

Martina Bet www.independent.co.uk 

A Liberal Democrat MP has taken aim at the “masters of spin” for increasingly manipulating the news cycle.

Richard Foord said that what began as political spin has now morphed into a practice bordering on deceit, saying “it is time to end the dead cat strategy”.

Mr Foord’s comments came as MPs debated two petitions relating to honesty in politics, which called on the Government to introduce legislation to make lying in the House of Commons a criminal offence.

While the Tiverton and Honiton MP said he worried about the “idea of opposition politicians simply getting locked up for telling the truth”, he criticised the Government for employing the “dead cat strategy” during the partygate scandal.

Deadcatting is a political tactic where a shocking or distracting topic is introduced to divert attention from a more damaging subject, often used to steer discourse away from negative media attention.

Speaking in Westminster Hall, Mr Foord said: “On April 12, 2022, the Metropolitan Police served a fixed penalty notice on the then prime minister (Boris Johnson) and the then chancellor of the Exchequer (Rishi Sunak) for attending a rule-breaking event in the Cabinet Office in June 2020.

“Newspapers were full of that dramatic news when, just two days later, the Government announced the so-called Rwanda partnership.

“Whatever you think about the Rwanda partnership, the £120-million scheme that would see some asylum claimants having their claims processed while they were in Rwanda, it is, at the very least, newsworthy.

“The point here is that we have been subject increasingly over the last couple of decades to something that started out as spin that has since become verging on the dishonest.

“So, if I take you back to 11 September 2001, we heard the phrase that it was a ‘good day to bury bad news’.

“At the time, that was symbolic of the worst aspects of the dark arts of spin. But what we have seen since that time is the development of this into an election campaigning technique. We now hear about the dead cat strategy.

“‘Dead catting’ is the idea that when something inconvenient is in the news headlines, the masters of spin might slap a dead cat in front of the public, a shocking announcement to divert attention away from those inconvenient headlines of the day.

“I think it is time to end ‘a good day to bury bad news’. It is time to end the dead cat strategy. It is a good day to bury the dead cat. We need more honesty in public life.”

Elsewhere during the debate, the SNP’s Martyn Day (Linlithgow and East Falkirk) highlighted the limitations of existing mechanisms like the MPs’ code of conduct and the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards.

Urging the Government to make it a criminal offence to lie to Parliament, he said: “Parliamentary privilege grants members the right to speak freely without fear of legal liability or other reprisal.

“However that privilege has been abused and that abuse goes against our code of conduct with little repercussion.

“We should grab this opportunity to examine the challenges and complexities of this matter and come together to find a solution that works.

“Legislation should be brought forward that prevents the trust between Government and those who are governed being further eroded.

“This should be done at the earliest opportunity, so we can move the backward nature of this Parliament forward.”

Cabinet Office minister Alex Burghart said he did not think the route set out by the petitions was appropriate.

He said: “If honesty is one of the core values of our system, then parliamentary privilege and freedom of speech within Parliament is one of the absolute pillars of the modern constitution.”

He went on: “If we were to accept the ideas put down, we would be accepting, nay, we would be sanctioning, the legal intimidation of MPs in the House of Commons.

“I am afraid that is something that this Government will not support.”

Thérèse Coffey blames “wrong sort of wind” for floods.

“Most of our rain comes from the West. This rain was coming from the other way. We don’t have quite as much experience on that”.

With ministers of such insight as this in the Cabinet, how can we fail! – Owl

Watch the video here

And Richard Foord mentions the plight of Seaton Hospital again.

Honesty in Politics —Westminster Hall debate 23 October

Here is an extract of what the REAL MP for Tiverton and Honiton has to say on the subject.The transcript of the full debate can be found here.

Richard Foord Liberal Democrat Spokesperson (Defence)  4:46, 23 October 2023

It is an honour to serve under your chairship, Mrs Murray…

….For example, the 2019 Conservative manifesto claimed that 40 new hospitals would be delivered in this Parliament, but since then we have heard that they are not hospitals, there are not 40 of them and they are not new. Instead, the community hospital in Seaton in my constituency is under threat and there are suggestions that part of it might be demolished by a wrecking ball.

We need honesty and integrity to underpin our democracy. As politicians, we have a job not only to call out fake news, but to stand up and act with integrity. Over recent years, we have seen a dangerous rise in misleading statements from political parties and politicians. Clearly, the public feel there is distortion going on. Research from the organisation Full Fact showed that 71% of the public believe there is more lying and misuse of facts in politics now than 30 years ago. Yet the Constitution Unit found that the public admire politicians who are prepared to stand up and admit mistakes, rather than being dishonest about them. On top of that, a wave of sleaze and scandal has emanated from the Conservative party, and it was one such scandal that resulted in me coming to office as the Member of Parliament for Tiverton and Honiton.

In this place, we have a mechanism for correcting the record and inadvertent errors by going before Parliament, but we need a better method for MPs to correct Hansard, rather than things being distorted and going viral over social media. We have to be wary of politicians who cook up half-baked proposals, pretend that they are meaningful policies and then claim they have scrapped them. I take as a case in point the Conservative party conference earlier this year, where ideas about seven bins were magicked up. There was a time when the office of Prime Minister was that of statesman, but to stoop this low is to go to the level less of statesman and more of binman. It is deceitful and against the Nolan principles.

Liz Saville-Roberts Shadow PC Spokesperson (Home Affairs), Shadow PC Spokesperson (Women and Equalities) , Plaid Cymru Westminster Leader, Shadow PC Spokesperson (Justice), Shadow PC Spokesperson (Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy), Shadow PC Spokesperson (Transport), Shadow PC Spokesperson (Attorney General)

I agree with much of what the hon. Gentleman says, but does he recognise that some of his proposed solutions already exist, yet we are still in the condition we find ourselves in? They do not work. Somehow or other, we need to shift the dial and, within the politics of the United Kingdom, stop rewarding those who say what they like and get away with it, and rather reward those who stick by the truth.

Richard Foord Liberal Democrat Spokesperson (Defence)

The right hon. Member is exactly right. We absolutely need to put on a pedestal those people who are prepared to stand up and admit when they have made a mistake and applaud those who correct their own record.

Before I close, one other aspect that I see increasingly is neighbouring MPs claiming credit for the work and achievements of the community campaigners in my part of Devon. Flattery is clearly at play here; it is sometimes said that mimicry is a form of flattery. However, what we are seeing is against the Nolan principles of honesty and accountability.

Finally, anyone who has joined the House of Commons Chamber at the start of proceedings will remember this part of the prayer that we listen to every day. We pray that Members

“never lead the nation wrongly through love of power, desire to please, or unworthy ideals but laying aside all private interests and prejudices keep in mind their responsibility”.

Sheryll Murray Conservative, South East Cornwall

Before I call the next speaker, I gently remind hon. Members that accusations of dishonesty against currently sitting MPs should be made via the proper channels, and not in a debate on a general motion.

For the first time in a few years the Times catches Owl vigilant

Jacob Rees-Mogg trousered £16,800 in severance pay for his seven-week stint as business secretary, it has been revealed.

Archie Mitchell www.independent.co.uk 

The former minister, now being paid more than £750 an hour as a GB News presenter, was entitled to the payout on leaving the government when Liz Truss quit as prime minister.

Mr Rees-Mogg had previously championed plans to cut the amount paid to departing civil servants by a quarter. A consultancy document produced during his time as government efficiency minister, unearthed by the Mirror, said changes to redundancy pay would “create significant savings on the current cost of exits”.

New documents also reveal Tory chairman Greg Hands pocketed £7,920 when he was sacked as a minister in the business department, having served for less than a year.

A month later – one week after the cut-off for ministers having to hand back severance payments – Mr Hands was handed a new government job in the trade department.

A Labour source told the Mirror: “It is hard to know who is the bigger hypocrite for accepting these handouts: Jacob Rees-Mogg, who said the severance pay of civil servants was too generous; or Greg Hands, who is constantly preaching that the Tories are the party of sound money.

“They are both as bad as each other, and they deserve a permanent redundancy notice from the British people.”

The new figures come just months after it emerged ministers and special advisers were handed £2.9m in severance payments during the upheaval of Boris Johnson’s premiership.

The dying days of Mr Johnson’s government, and Ms Truss’s chaotic 49-day stint in Downing Street, saw a raft of resignations and sackings, with the turmoil creating a significant bill for the Government.

An annual report on special advisers showed the taxpayer stumped up £2.9m in severance payouts for the staffers.

Meanwhile many former ministers collected thousands of pounds in severance payouts after losing their government jobs.

Ms Truss and Mr Johnson were given nearly £20,000 each, despite the former being in office for just 49 days.