Click to access 170517-combined-annual-council-agenda.pdf
page 39
Says it all really!
Category Archives: Phil Twiss
Is a Tory councillor calling women “nutter feminist bitches” worse than “culling” Tory councillors?
““An Exeter Tory election candidate has been forced to apologise on social media for a series of shocking and offensive messages he sent from his Twitter account.
Aric Gilinsky, candidate for St David’s & Haven Banks in next week’s county council elections, made several inappropriate remarks in 2011 concerning members of the Catholic Church and other Twitter users, including one he branded ‘some nutter feminist bitch.'”
Well, at least he didn’t suggest a cull of councillors … THAT remark led to EDDC Tory Phil Twiss reporting Claire Wright to the police – even though his Leader used exactly the same words in an article in the Daily Telegraph:
No such worries for THIS candidate – he just has to apologise and all is forgiven.
Twiss and shout in Feniton
Phil Twiss is hoping to follow in the footsteps of disgraced fellow Tory Graham Brown, and latterly independent councillor Claire Wright to represent the ward of Feniton and Honiton in the forthcoming County Council elections.
Leaflets currently adding to EDDC’s recycling efforts include a testimonial from MP Neil Parish that “Phil will be an asset in a number of matters, such as helping positively to continue with the work put together, to make Feniton more secure from flooding”.
Strangely there seems to be no room to acknowledge Graham Brown’s inability to get a flood scheme going for Feniton, Claire Wright’s dogged success in ensuring that the scheme was not forgotten, and independent District Councillor Susie Bond’s determination and success in getting the £1.6m programme implemented. Not to mention Susie Bond’s tireless work as a flood warden and information broadcaster each time danger has struck the village.
Any “continuation” is totally down to the efforts of these two ladies.
Whether Mr Twiss is willing to acknowledge their contribution on the stump remains to be seen.
Readers will recall it was Mr Twiss who, in 2014, took offence at a metaphor on Ms Wright’s blog about the need to “cull” Conservatives in East Devon.
Police subsequently declined to investigate. Hardly surprising since Conservative Leader David Cameron used the word in exactly the same sense in 2012:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2012/sep/04/david-cameron-cabinet-reshuffle-deliver
Truth or post-truth in Feniton’s election?
Rural infrastructure- lack of
One for Councillor Twiss, perhaps. And him apparently being a telecomms expert, he might also tell us how he plans to ensure that many rural communities in East Devon can move – not to the new 5G phone service everyone is now anticipating – but just to the much older 3G phone service that some areas of East Devon have never had and which is now considered old-fashioned and out-of-date.
Bet the new EDDC HQ will have 5G …
” … Existing discussions on rural infrastructure often focus on broadband, where demand for digital services often outstrips many urban places but the task of connecting residents and businesses up remains great due to lower population densities and geography which combine to make the commercial case for investment more challenging.
There are debates over whether having a broadband internet ‘service’ should be treated as a basic ‘utility’ much like electricity, water or the traditional telephone or seen as a luxury item. And whether rural residents and businesses expect the same or comparable levels of connectivity as their urban counterparts?
Other discussions have focused on transport: rural residents tend to travel longer distances, have higher costs, greater reliance on car use and increasingly limited access to public transport. These issues are incredibly important to rural communities and while they should not be overlooked there is a tendency to consider them individually and in isolation rather than collectively.
Going forward, we need to monitor whether, how and when existing Government infrastructure projects and programmes are benefitting rural areas. We also need to be mindful of a gap opening up between whether we should update / improve existing infrastructure or provide brand new infrastructure. …
http://www.rsnonline.org.uk/analysis/mind-the-rural-infrastructure-gap
Inequality in rural communities
Councillor Phil Twiss is in charge of rolling out broadband to areas in East Devon that have low or no broadband speeds. EDDC opted out of a Devon-wide project, preferring to choose its own way of doing things. Contact Councillor Twiss if you are unhappy about broadband provision in your area:
Email: ptwiss@eastdevon.gov.uk
Telephone: 01404 891327
Address: Swallowcliff, Beacon, Honiton, EX14 4TT
“Almost 10 million people in the UK live in areas of England defined as rural. They are – on average – 5.3 years older than their counterparts in urban areas, with settlements in sparse areas tending to have the highest proportion of their populations amongst the older age groups, the report said.
The outward migration of young people and inward migration of older people, who tend to have greater health and social care needs, as well as poorer public transport links, are having a “significant impact” on people’s daily lives and access to services, it concluded.
Eighty per cent of rural residents live within four kilometres of a GP surgery, compared with 98 per cent of the urban population, while only 55 per cent of rural households compared to 97 per cent of urban households are within eight kilometres of a hospital, the study found.
Crucially, a combination of the older demographic and the unavailability of high-speed broadband has led to a growing digital gap between urban and rural areas, which is enhancing loneliness among the elderly and preventing people from benefiting from important developments and innovations in access to health-related services, the report went on.
There is a growing social and economic gap between those who are connected and those who are not – the ‘digitally excluded’ — with 13 per cent of the adult UK population (6.4 million) never having used the Internet, and 18 per cent saying that they do not have Internet access at home.
“Rural social networks are breaking down with a consequent increase in social isolation and loneliness, especially among older people,” the report states.
“The fact that social isolation influences health outcomes in its own right suggests that this and the emotional and mental wellbeing of people in rural areas is an important and hitherto neglected area in the promotion of public health.” …
… We need to be more observant of how dependent that older population in rural areas is, and the pockets of isolation and deprivation that you get are there, and they’re very often hidden because it all looks like a nice rural ideal.”
The report also states that the level of poverty in certain rural areas was also a serious problem that was frequently overlooked, with almost one in seven (15 per cent) rural households living in relative poverty after housing costs are taken into account.”
A lack of affordable housing in some areas is now extending to those on average incomes, not just people on lower incomes, leading to people — generally of the younger generation — moving out to urban areas and increasing concerns about the sustainability of rural communities.”
Rural broadband: “Just ****ing do it”, says farmer’s wife – who did it (Councillor Twiss please note)
Spoiler alert: it relies on farmers and other landowners being altruistic – many of ours talk only to developers who pay squillions for housing land – or they are developers (and sometimes councillor developers) themselves who know the price of everything and the value of nothing so would NEVER allow this solution to the rural broadband problem.
“I’m just a farmer’s wife,” says Christine Conder, modestly. But for 2,300 members of the rural communities of Lancashire she is also a revolutionary internet pioneer.
Her DIY solution to a neighbour’s internet connectivity problems in 2009 has evolved into B4RN, an internet service provider offering fast one gigabit per second broadband speeds to the parishes which nestle in the picturesque Lune Valley.
That is 35 times faster than the 28.9 Mbps average UK speed internet connection according to Ofcom.
It all began when the trees which separated Chris’s neighbouring farm from its nearest wireless mast – their only connection to the internet, provided by Lancaster University – grew too tall.
Something more robust was required, and no alternatives were available in the area, so Chris decided to take matters into her own hands.
She purchased a kilometre of fibre-optic cable and commandeered her farm tractor to dig a trench.
After lighting the cable, the two farms were connected, with hers feeding the one behind the trees.
“We dug it ourselves and we lit [the cable] ourselves and we proved that ordinary people could do it,” she says.
“It wasn’t rocket science. It was three days of hard work.”
Her motto, which she repeats often in conversation, is JFDI. Three of those letters stand for Just Do It. The fourth you can work out for yourself.
B4RN now claims to have laid 2,000 miles (3,218km) of cable and connected a string of local parishes to its network. It won’t connect a single household, so the entire parish has to be on board before it will begin to build.
Each household pays £30 per month with a £150 connection fee and larger businesses pay more. Households must also do some of the installation themselves.
The entire infrastructure is fibre-optic cable right to the property, rather than just to the cabinet, with existing copper phone lines running from that to the home, as generally offered by British Telecom.
The service is so popular that the company has work lined up for the next 10 years and people from as far as Sierra Leone have attended the open days it holds a couple of times a year.
The bulk of the work is done by volunteers, although there are now 15 paid staff also on board. Farmers give access to their land and those with equipment like diggers and tractors do the heavy work.
However other landowners can charge – B4RN has complained on its Facebook page about the price of cabling under a disused railway bridge owned by Highways England.
A spokesperson told the BBC these are “standard industry costs” which include a £4,500 fee for surveying, legal fees and a price per metre for the cable installation.
While B4RN has yet to make a profit, once it has paid back its shareholders it should be in good financial health – although one of the conditions is that profits must be ploughed back into the community.
Chris’s services to rural broadband have recognised by the Queen – she was awarded an MBE in 2015, alongside Barry Forde, a retired university lecturer who now leads the co-operative.
Incredibly, many B4RN customers had been surviving on dial-up services or paying high fees for satellite feeds. Chris says that some still are.
With farmers having to register online with the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) within five days of every calf being born in order for it to enter the food chain, connectivity is vital.
“All the farmers who haven’t got broadband have to rely on land agents or auction marts or public wi-fi spaces which we haven’t got round here either, or paying somebody to do it,” says Chris.
“What the farmers were finding was the dial-up just couldn’t cope with it.
“They bought satellites, but then the children would use all the satellite feed to do their things and then they came to use it at night and there was no feed left, they’d gone over the data and they were being charged a fortune for what they then used.
“So the farmers have been incredibly supportive of this and that’s why they’ve given us free rein throughout the fields, which we go through to connect them and then we get to the villages which subsidise the farmers’ connections.
“You couldn’t do it just for the farmers alone, but you couldn’t get to the village without the farmers so it’s tit for tat. …”
Fast broadband more important than good schools or good transport when buying houses
If you don’t have fast broadband (at least 10 mbts/second measured by a service such as Speedtest which is free) contact EDDC councillor Phil Twiss (ptwiss@eddc.gov.uk) who took us out of the consortium now bringing fast speeds to Exmoor ans Dartmoor because he thought we would be better off going it alone with a grant we didn’t get.
“… That has been confirmed by several studies. Most recently, Broadband Genie research found that slow broadband would put three-quarters of respondents off buying or renting a new home, and that 28% would be prepared to pay more for a property with fast internet.
Another study – this time from property website Rightmove – found that broadband speed has become a deal maker or breaker in many property sales, and incredibly that broadband is ranked as more important than transport links and nearby schools when people search for property details.
Other experts now describe broadband as the ‘fourth utility’, after water, gas and electricity, demonstrating the fundamental role the internet now plays in our everyday lives.
More working from home
Andrew Sayle, Zen’s product manager for broadband, agrees: “It’s easy to see why broadband is so important to those looking to buy or rent property. Look at everything we use the internet for, from shopping and paying bills to booking appointments and watching films. More people than ever are choosing to work from home, so their ability to make a living is directly affected by the speed and reliability of their broadband connection. I suspect broadband will only become a more important factor in property decisions in future.”
Andrew is undoubtedly right. According to Cisco, by 2019 the gigabyte equivalent of all the movies ever made will cross the global internet every two minutes. More and more of us will be using the internet to download large quantities of data, often through streaming films and TV shows.
And that’s not all. Many of us already remotely control our homes through WiFi-enabled appliances. Everything from heating and lighting to home security systems and kitchen appliances can now be controlled with a smartphone app. A good broadband connection will only become more crucial to 21st century life.”
https://blog.zen.co.uk/good-schools-good-transport-links-good-broadband-new-rules-house-buying/
Well done those EDDC Tory councillors! But watch your backs now
Unconfirmed reports suggest that Tory councillors Grundy (Exe Valley) and Pepper (Broadclyst) were the two sensible councillors who voted against the PegasusLife Knowle planning application.
So, no-one can accuse anyone of a “Sidmouth stitch up”.
It seems unlikely that the two councillors will be getting any gifts from under the Tory Christmas tree from Santa Phil Twiss – the official EDDC Tory Whip – who denies ever having used it but who is said to be less than chuffed at the result.
Of course, not being whipped, no-one will expect them to be removed from the DMC for not following non-whipped orders ….
Poor or non-existent broadband in East Devon? Move to remote Exmoor or Dartmoor
“Councillor David Hall, Somerset County Council’s Cabinet member for Business, Inward Investment and Policy, added: “The Connecting Dartmoor & Exmoor programme builds on the success of the first phase of the CDS programme and is already making significant impact with some 2049 premises already able to connect to the wireless network and many more will be able to connect before Christmas.
“This will bring long-term economic benefits to the Moors that will be felt for many generations to come.”
You remember CDS – the project that EDDC broadband supremo and Tory Whip Phil Twiss pulled East Devon out of so it could go it alone with better grants. Except the better grants were refused – in part because CDC was already in the pipeline …
Beggars belief! Local Tories implicitly defend local bed cuts then put out a press release saying the total opposite!
EDDC Tories have released the following statement and press release below.
The wording of this statement seems to imply to Owl that our local Tories are 100% behind the cutting of beds and the closure of our community hospitals. Note that it takes no account of the warning bells from the King’s Fund (plans are vague, poorly costed and badly evidenced) and the UK Statistics Agency (the NHS is underfunded) – it simply offers knee-jerk pandering to a CCG shown to be not fit for purpose and (much as usual in Devon these days) with people at the top with glaring conflicts of interest.
THE STATEMENT
“We have decided as a group to issue this statement on the proposed bed closures throughout Devon which we will continue to oppose in their current form. Those wishing to cause mischief are doing a great disservice to our residents as they do not offer a sustainable solution to the endemic problems the NHS faces and tinkering with the process is no solution to the root and branch reform needed. The process is being piloted in Devon and Sir Hugo Swire and Neil Parish, our MPs, are continuing the fight in Westminster as do I as the South West Board Member for the District Councils Network nationally and as a Member of Devon County Council’s Health and Wellbeing Scrutiny Committee.”
Readers will recall that Councillor Leader Diviani voted against DCC Councillor Claire Wright’s motion to “stop the clock” on the closure of Honiton hospital until its viability had been reassessed and rechecked. Councillor Leader Diviani and his fellow Tories can hardly claim to be defending our services – indeed they seem anxious for the process to be concluded as quickly as possible, including the closure of Honiton hospital.
They also state that our MPs are “fighting for us” when their voting records, lack of speeches on our behalf and watering down of a parliamentary motion shows that they are doing nothing of the sort.
To all those vulnerable people out there who will suffer from these cuts: use your vote much more wisely in council by-elections, elections and general elections.
Now, compare what they say in the paragraph above to the press release sent out below. REMEMBER, when they say THEY – they mean their own party!
THE PRESS RELEASE
STARTS
“Conservatives call for second opinion on Devon NHS funding crisis treatment
ENSURE THAT BED-CUT ‘CURE’ DOESN’T DAMAGE PATIENTS
East Devon Conservatives are deeply worried about proposals from the NEW* Devon Clinical Commissioning Group to restructure hospital care in the North, East and West of the county in a bid to plug a £400 million budget shortfall over the next three years.
They believe the hospital bed closures proposed by the Devon health provider as the cure for a funding crisis may be the wrong treatment – and could have harmful side-effects for patients.
So the 37 Conservative members of East Devon District Council are sending a collective response to the CCG’s current consultation in the hope of persuading the NHS commissioning group to change its approach to tackling the immediate £100m funding gap, expected to rise to £400m by 2020.
The Conservative councillors are advising the CCG that it would be dangerous to move from a system of mostly inpatient treatment to care at home until a robust structure is in place to provide the alternative cover. Taking this step without the necessary resources in place and with no vital transition budget to call upon, could put patients at risk, they say.
Dangerous
Having studied the CCG’s report, Conservative group members were unimpressed with the strength of the argument in favour of bed closures and home care, especially because the CCG has not been able to provide accurate and meaningful financial detail or convincing trial evidence to back up its proposed Community Care Package.
They also wonder if the massive funding gap could not be closed by greater attention to efficiency savings.
And they are counselling the commissioning group not to adopt a “one-size-fits-all” approach to tackling the area’s financial ills, bearing in mind the differing demographics and age profiles of each local authority area in Devon, especially remote rural communities. Patient vulnerability and loneliness must also be addressed.
The CCG appears to favour a new model of care that has been subject to limited testing, with little hard evidence that it improves the service to patients.
The Conservative group are not convinced by the scant evidence provided after their requests for more detail and are nervous of the CCG’s reliance on a notional target of county hospital beds, regardless of variations in proven need.
Blunt instrument
They want to know more about the 80 clinicians the CCG claims to be in support of the new model. And they are sceptical of a ‘blunt instrument’ approach to treatment, especially when many elderly patients have dementia in addition to multiple clinical problems.
Finally, the Conservative members contest that many areas in East Devon appear to have a reducing stock of nursing and residential home beds. This only aggravates the situation, because these beds are often required in the short or long-term for patients stuck in hospital.
Phil Twiss, Conservative Group Secretary, said: “Some people want to boycott this consultation process – but that won’t help anyone. We believe constructive feedback is the best way.
“We all agree that bed-blocking is a serious issue and we also accept that the clinical commissioning group need to save money. The question is how should they go about it so as to deliver results without making the situation worse.
“We feel that they have the solution the wrong way round. They want to move to a care-in-the-home model at a time when the resources just aren’t there to support that model. It might be the right approach in theory, but it will only work in practice if the social care infrastructure is robust enough to take the strain – and it is not.
Panic measures
“We’re not convinced that the new model has delivered the right standard of success in trial areas and we don’t believe it can be rolled out across other parts of the county until the necessary support structure is in place. And we should not be moving to a new model as a panic measure to solve a funding shortfall that could be tackled by other means.
“For example, a lot of money can be wasted on high-cost agency staff who appear to be a short-term emergency man-power fix but all too often are relied upon as part of the workforce establishment.
“We don’t know whether the budget shortfall was perhaps caused by wasteful practices that are still in place, and so we don’t know whether the CCG could find alternative ways to save money. What we do know is that their current proposals are unconvincing and ill-advised”.
East Devon Conservatives will be responding to the CCG consultation with their views and will be calling on the commissioning group to think again.
ENDS
SO, are they for cuts or against them? A dangerous business deciding which bit is truth and which bit is post-truth!
Exmouth seafront cost increase – fantasy, incompetent, iconic or ironic!
“Calls have been made for the sacking of the ‘owner’ of the Exmouth Seafront Regeneration Project after costs spiralled from £1.5million to more than £3million.
However, East Devon District Council’s (EDDC) cabinet backed the plans with a majority vote, despite heavy criticism from some councillors.
http://www.exmouthjournal.co.uk/news/seafront_plans_backed_despite_soaring_costs_1_4780508
Rob Longhurst (Ind), Ben Ingham (Ind) and Eileen Wragg (LD) spoke against, saying that it was incompetence.
Ian Chubb said it was worth paying and he was happy paying the extra costs. Unclear whether he meant worth paying despite the increases or worth paying despite the incompetence, but nice of him to offer to fund the increased costs personally.
Phil Twiss said they had to proceed because to stop would be to go backwards. Of course only true because they have destroyed existing attractions before getting the plans right and before knowing the real costs – so they can’t go back.
Philip Skinner got his words mixed up when he said the plans were iconic but clearly he meant ironic, and thought it was good for Exmouth because they all like doing watersports.
Tom Wright obviously thought the debate was about football not water-sports because he kept referring to the premier league, and said that Exmouth residents should be grateful for the cost increases.
Honestly, Trump or EDDC Tories – not sure which are the greater fantasists!!”
Conservative whip chooses councillors for Port Royal project
“During Wednesday’s meeting the cabinet agreed two Sidmouth councillors – Cllr John Dyson and
Cllr David Barratt – would represent EDDC on the group.
Councillor Phil Twiss said: “We must not forget Sidmouth is more than just a town, we have Sidford, Sidbury and Sidford rural – they will be excluded if it is just seen as an EDDC town ward councilproject.
“We want to include as many people as we can, in every way we can – we weren’t perfect in Exmouth and we have all learnt lessons from that – we have to be more open and inclusive.
“This has gone on for far too long, it seems like it has been 40 or 50 years … It is a part of the
town that is let down badly. We need to help Sidmouth Town Council go ahead with this.”
Cllr Twiss proposed they had one town council ward member on the group – Cllr John Dyson along with Cllr David Barratt, so they could have a more wider and open representation.
Cllr Dawn Manley said: “I have every faith in Cllr Barratt and Cllr Dyson but I find it extraordinary [that] the Conservative whip has chosen who they want to go forward. It makes no sense to me that the town councillors, who were voted for because of these specific issues are being
sidelined.”
Owl says: Councillor Twiss ALWAYS says he does not whip despite holding the post which would be redundant if he did not!
Now he can prove it by allowing Sidmouth councillors to choose their reps!
More rural broadband – for Dorset
“DOZENS more communities in Dorset are to benefit from the roll-out of superfast broadband.
More than 26 per cent of customers in the Superfast Dorset area have already chosen to take-up the service, triggering a “Gainshare” award under the terms of the contract with BT to be used to further extend the fibre roll-out.
More than 800 premises in 31 areas have just been added to the Superfast Dorset roll-out plans for next year as a result of the high take up and efficiencies in delivery, which together are worth more than £1million. …”
East Devon chose not to join a consortium to bring broadband to its rural areas, preferring to go it alone. It was turned down for grants because its bid duplicated the consortium bid.
If you are unhappy about this state of affairs, contact EDDC councillor Phil Twiss, the council’s rural broadband champion, who is the non-mover and non-shaker of this particular non-project:
ptwiss@eastdevon.gov.uk
In the past, Councillor Twiss has been quick to comment on this blog, we look forward to his comments on this topic.
Rural broadband guarantees: can EDDC deliver? If so, at what cost?
“Dozens of broadband network providers are expected to bid for six contracts to improve broadband connections in Somerset and Devon.
The second phase of a superfast broadband scheme for Somerset has been launched this week by Connecting Devon and Somerset (CDS).”
This does not include East Devon, which decided to “go it alone”, applied for grants and was turned down because too much of the project was like the one they left!
Recently, the government has said EVERYONE must get a decent broadband service and is bringing in legislation to this effect:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/consumer-interests-at-heart-of-digital-economy-bill
and a Parliamentary Briefing paper just published states:
“Broadband Delivery UK (BDUK) part of the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) is responsible for implementing the Government’s policy on superfast broadband roll-out which consists of three stages:
• provide superfast broadband coverage to 90% of UK premises by early 2016 and access to basic broadband (2Mbps) for all from December 2015 – “Phase 1”
• provide superfast broadband coverage to 95% of UK premises by the end of 2017 – “Phase 2”
• explore options to provide superfast coverage to the hardest to reach parts of the UK – “the final 5%”
The BDUK coverage targets include the commercial roll-out, however, the BDUK programme and funding is focussed on those areas that are not reached by the commercial roll-out.”
BRIEFING PAPER, Number CBP06643, 4 July 2016
So, where does this leave East Devon? Over to you, Councillor Twiss, Broadband Supremo ….
How did business-park on-a-Sidford -floodplain come to be in the Local Plan?
From the good old days of the much-lamented Sidmouth Independent News on 25 July 2015:
“Cllr Graham Troman (Sidmouth) claimed there was “no justification” for an out-of-town business park which would damage the vibrancy of Sidmouth town centre. He was shocked by the dubious way in which this proposal had been inserted in the Local Plan without any proper discussion.
Cllr Christine Drew (Sidmouth) said that EDDC had ignored overwhelming public opposition to the site, and she was very suspicious of the recent “minor amendment” to add retail to the type of businesses proposed.
Stuart Hughes argued that adequate employment land could be provided for Sidmouth by realising the potential of the Alexandria Road site, and new access could be provided for half the cost of the £1 million pounds estimated by EDDC planners. And funding might be available for this from a variety of sources.
He also highlighted the acute flood risk at the Sidford site which was on a flood plain. The Council’s argument that the problem could be solved by a SUDS system was weak: a similar system at Woolbrook failed during recent flooding. He feared the impact that building at Sidford would have on flooding downstream.
As county councillor responsible for roads, he stressed the inadequacy of the main road which would serve the site which was subject to regular flooding.
Cllr Mike Allen (Honiton), former chair of the Local Plan Panel made a swingeing attack on the Sidford allocation.
It was “not compliant” with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) which gave “great weight” to the protection of Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty.
There was no evidence that it was needed by Sidmouth. It would require people to commute into the town to work. It was “against the public interest”.
He was also suspicious of how the Built Up Area Boundary had been extended to the north of Sidford by officers without consultation.
It would be straightforward to remove the Sidford allocation from the Local Plan: failure to do so would risk the rejection of the whole plan by the Inspector. He seconded Cllr Troman’s motion that it should be deleted.
Chief Executive Mark Williams then advised that this would not be possible legally as it was not a minor amendment.
This provoked an extraordinary attack on Mr Williams by Cllr Allen. His advice was a “biased” view which showed ignorance of the NPPF. He did not have a “grip” on the legal situation, and had not taken account of all the legal considerations.
Tory Whip, Phil Twiss, jumped up to defend the CEO who must be right “because he is a solicitor” and Cllr Allen wasn’t!
Allen, who, in his day job is the Officer Responsible for Regeneration at South Somerset District Council, calmly replied that he had a considerable legal authority on his side – the NPPF.
A rather shell-shocked Council then proceeded to vote on the motion to delete Sidford. It was rejected.
The Tory majority – immune to argument- went on to approve all the “minor amendments” to the Local Plan which approves the Knowle and Sidford proposals.”
Voting in the digital age – just one problem …
“In a digital age when voting and registration ought to be getting quicker and easier the UK seems to be bent on keeping the system slow and inconvenient.
Other countries do it differently. Belgium, Norway and Israel are trying internet voting, as are a couple of states in America. Online voting would be a boon to Devon and Cornwall, which has pockets of sparsely populated areas where voters have a relatively long and off-putting distance to travel to the polling station.”
The problem? Many areas of rural Devon (including East Devon) still do not have internet access and seem unlikely to have it for many years, if at all.
And we are still awaiting Councillor Twiss’s Plan B after EDDC’s application for a grant from the Government was turned down (and turned down again on appeal) after the Government said it was not value-for-money.
Broadband (orlack of) for East Devon – the never-ending story
Recall that EDDC decided to pull out of the Devon and Somerset broadband bid citing the reason that the bid was not transparent!!! They then applied for funding from another government source, assuring us that this would be successful, and it was refused – because, in part, it duplicated the bid that EDDC had decided to withdraw from!
Scrutiny Committee Minute 14 April 2016:
“The Portfolio Holder Central Services and the Portfolio Holder Finance continued to work with a number of providers to encourage as many as possible to come forward in filling the gap of service that phase 2 of the CDS project would leave , even though this authority does not control the budget for broadband delivery.
…..
RESOLVED
- That the committee supports the Portfolio Holder Central Services [Councillor Phil Twiss] in his endeavours for alternative solutions to meet the needs of the areas not covered by the CDS project;
- That a progress report and revised timetable is requested from CDS;
- That the committee receives a further update from the Portfolio Holder Central Services in approximately six months time or as soon as there are further significant developments.
http://eastdevon.gov.uk/media/1674827/140416-scrutiny-minutes.pdf
More on rural broadband – yet another omnishambles
It appears that the Government felt that there might be too much overlap between the EDDC bid and the one for the rest of Devon that EDDC pulled out of to go it alone and that it would not be a good use of public money.
From papers submitted to the Scrutiny Committee:
From a report bt Phil Twiss:
“Update to EDDC scrutiny committee (14th April meeting) re Broadband provision
You will be aware that EDDC submitted a bid for funding to the Broadband Delivery UK (BDUK) South West Ultrafast Broadband fund in respect of a technical solution (EDDC in conjunction with Broadway Partners) to provide wider provision of Broadband in East Devon “not spots/white areas” where the current Connecting Devon and Somerset (CDS)/British Telecommunications (BT), BT commercial or any other provider has any current plans to do so. The application was for £2 million.
I regret that our application was unsuccessful as you will see from the two letters that are appended to this update.
The reasons given for refusal to progress our application are disappointing given there is no comment on the validity or otherwise of the technical solution proposed in the application and mainly relates to tax payers money potentially double funding the project and EDDC’s unwillingness to share data with CDS to avoid this.
EDDC has never been unwilling to share data with CDS as is acknowledged by CDS and as recently as 4th February 2016 in the E Mail below from me to CDS which again sets out our position. BDUK has assumed a view on data sharing without asking EDDC if this was actually the case.
The refusal was appealed by the EDC CEO and the second letter as attached maintains the position where for reasons best known to BDUK suggests that in order to avoid double funding an NDA (non-disclosure agreement) would need to be signed with CDS whereby no details of where, when or how tax payers money could be published by EDDC in terms of openness and transparency. To date EDDC has refused to sign an NDA with CDS for either phase 1 or going in to phase 2 delivery of Broadband where the explanation given is on grounds of commercial confidentiality; difficult to comprehend given no contracts have been agreed for phase 2 delivery of service!”
SO EDDC IS SAYING IT WANTS OPENNESS AND TRANSPARENCY IN CONTRACTS!!!! THE COUNCIL THAT REFUSES TO PUBLISH ANY INFORMATION ON ITS OWN CONTRACTS!!!!
What the government said:
“To avoid using State aid, it would be necessary to ensure that any public funding be provided on the same basis as commercial finance, in other words, via a loan or similar with commercial rates of interest. As such, there may be more appropriate approaches to accessing the necessary project finance, including via commercial lending, or possibly via the proposed Broadband Infrastructure Fund that was announced in last autumn’s Spending Review.”
Click to access 140416-scrutiny-agenda-combined.pdf
So, our rural businesses are still up the creek without paddles.
Next scrutiny committee agenda published – rural broadband down the pan
Really worth a full read but here are some highlights:
Broadband (or lack of):
“I regret that our application was unsuccessful as you will see from the two letters that are appended to this update.” (Twiss quote)
The exchange of correspondence between EDDC and the grant funders who turned down the application is VERY enlightening and should be a major embarrassment to lead councillor Phil Twiss.
Having pulled out of the Devon-wide consortium that has just been granted extra funding we are – precisely nowhere, in fact worse than that, much further back with rural broadband provision than ever before.
Public engagement (or lack of):
A risible attempt to produce a (very brief) report that pretends that EDDC consults appropriately and widely – but listing examples where the public has the exact opposite opinion!
Website (or lack of)
Boasting that more and more forms are going online and how wonderful the industry insiders think it is (so it’s a pity you can rarely find what you are looking for as an outsider and with many documents missing. But how you can get gold stars from your colleagues when your search function is described only as “fairly good” beats Owl!
and the committee’s draft report for the council’s own annual report all up for scrutiny.
A note for Councillor Twiss
(who has been so very quiet recently, particularly about his Mastermind subject of rural broadband)
Remember a while ago you got apoplectic about an elector who suggested Conservatives should be culled in East Devon? And you reported him to the police cyber-crime unit (who chose not to investigate), although you described that as “leaving the case on file” at the time … A headline from the day”
“Cabinet member Phil Twiss took offence at a comment posted on Claire Wright’s web page in response to a council U-turn on the location for a new office headquarters.
Mrs Wright, an independent who lives in West Hill, Ottery St Mary, removed the post, which was written by a reader, Chris Wilkins.
Critics of the local authority have accused Mr Twiss of over-reacting, wasting police time and playing politics ahead of the general election …
… A notice pinned to the West Hill Conservative Party notice board said the matter had been referred to the authorities.
“No matter how much we disagree on various issues to knowingly publish a comment in likely breach of the Malicious Communications Act 1988 such as this is below contempt and I trust you will join me in condemning this action,” Coun Twiss wrote.
He added that “in the absence of any sort of explanation” from Coun Wright, he had “passed the details of the blog together with those of a resident of Feniton to Devon And Cornwall Police Cyber crime unit for comment”.
http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk/Police-urged-investigate-cull-Tories-blog-remark/story-25016293-detail/story.html
Well, we do hope you will report today’s (potentially much more serious) Daily Telegraph for the following headline and strapline:
“Why the IDS earthquake (probably) won’t kill Cameron
Iain Duncan Smith’s departure doesn’t represent a direct hit to a sitting prime minister – although whether he has inflicted a flesh wound or something more serious depends on the Conservative Party itself”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/12199994/Why-the-IDS-earthquake-probably-wont-kill-Cameron.html
After all, not to do so would imply that the original complaint was purely party political wouldn’t it?
Oh, and the same for all those headlines about knives out, stabbings in the back and the like – very nasty. Not to mention Chancellor Osborne being grilled.
East Devon Watch 