“Labour is now the party of rural England”

Triatram Hunt (Labour) writing in the Daily Telegraph:

” … Once, Conservative politicians believed in conservation; in defending the institutions that helped preserve our national character. Well not this lot. In the last Parliament, they came for the forests; now they have our national parks, green belt and marine environment in their sights.

So enraging is this casual disregard for England’s loveliness that it makes you question the health of our democracy itself. What allows a government with so paltry a majority the mandate to ride roughshod over something so ingrained within our national psyche? We in the Labour Party have a responsibility to hold this Government to account more effectively and to present a new vision of conservation, rural prosperity and stewardship. Because it is our bequest, as a great governing party of the 20th century, that is now in jeopardy.”

https://t.co/RErUZ4y8bz

“Prohibitively expensive” to connect remaining rural broadband not-spots

The most recent figures showed that 3.3 million homes and businesses have been connected since 2010 – taking superfast broadband from 45 per cent of premises to 83 per cent.

However, ministers admit that it may be “prohibitively” expensive to connect the remaining premises, because of “demanding terrain and increased distances”.

Seven trial schemes have been set up to try to reach the “final five per cent”, using new solutions including fibre optic, satellite and wireless.

Ministers, who cut funding from £10 million to £8 million, say the results of those trials will be “published soon”, but there is no date for putting in the technology in rural areas.

Instead, David Cameron announced he would explore a Universal Service Obligation, the right to demand 10Mbps wherever you live, by 2020.

Some areas of London, Birmingham and Manchester are also projected to have large blackspots, but commercial operators are expected to plug those gaps by 2017.”

http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk/Homes-parts-Westcountry-missing-superfast/story-28400169-detail/story.html

Yet EDDC maintains that it can connect remaining rural areas in East Devon itself more cheaply than the Devon and Somerset Consortium.

Owl sees expensive consultants on the horizon … though no doubt the new HQ in Honiton will be super, super fast!

Unspinning spin about rural broadband

A letter to the editor of Western Morning News:

Your piece in the WMN, Dec 18:

http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk/South-West-telecoms-firms-ready-phase-2/story-28389453-detail/story.html

makes an excellent marketing piece for Connecting Devon & Somerset, but you are misleading your readers with this supposed good news story when infact CDS is a basket case compared to almost every other county council run superfast broadband programme in England:

What you don’t tell readers is that:

1) This is CDS’s third attempt to find Phase 2 suppliers after they dumped 25 suppliers who attended their previous Phase 2 supplier day in 2014 and then failed to secure an exclusive contract with BT in June 2015.

2) Devon & Somerset are now one year behind almost every other County in England at getting Phase 2 off the ground.

3) That contract negotiations with BT collapsed in June because not one District Council in Devon would commit a penny of match funding because CDS would not tell them what they would be buying for their money.
Read the quotes from East Devon District Council’s Leader, Paul Diviani on the EDDC website about why he would not give match funding to CDS and now wants to run his own programme!!!…..

http://eastdevon.gov.uk/news/2015/12/east-devon-district-council-will-pursue-pivotal-broadband-project-on-behalf-of-its-communities/

4) Now that the EU State Aid for the programme expired on June 30, an exemption agreement is having to be negotiated with Brussels and the EU Competition Commissioner is forcing the Phase 2 contract to be broken up into 6 or more small contracts for smaller areas of the two counties and that any supplier who is awarded a contract will be required to make all their infrastructure (fibre cable, ducts, masts, DSLAM cabinets etc etc) available to all their competitors to use.

Rather than the good news story CDS would have you believe this is, CDS are simply picking up the pieces of their two previous failed attempts to find suppliers and worst of all, having wasted two years, council budgets are tighter for 2016 than they were in 2015, so that when contracts with suppliers may possibly be signed in the second half of 2016, there is likely to be less money available for the Phase 2 programme than their was in June 2015.

And who suffer as a result of this incompetence?…….Devon & Somerset’s rural taxpayers who are being left out of this digital age.

Please correct your misleading article.

B4RDS (Broadband for Rural Devon & Somerset)
http://www.b4rds.org/

“Rural hospital journeys by public transport almost twice as long as cities”

“People who live in rural areas of England take at least 57 minutes on average to reach their nearest hospital by public transport, almost twice as long as their urban counterparts at 33 minutes, according to a report published by the Department for Transport.

The report also finds that those in urban areas have, on average, access to between three and four hospitals within an hour’s journey compared with one for rural residents.

For both urban and rural residents hospitals are the key local service which takes the longest to reach, but the time required for rural dwellers to reach vital services is not restricted to hospital care. It takes people in rural locations longer to access all eight key services covered by the report, including employment, health and education facilities.”

http://gu.com/p/4f4k6

Digital divide could affect rural NHS services

The digital divide could see rural residents in the West missing out on being able to access services at doctors’ surgeries and even online consultations with their GP, according to a broadband campaigner.

Parish councillor Graham Long was speaking after a review of digital services in the NHS in England called for GPs to actively encourage patients to go online to book appointments and order repeat prescriptions.

It was drawn up by Internet entrepreneur Baroness Martha Lane Fox, who was asked by Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt to look at how take-up of Internet services could be made widely available. She recommended ensuring every NHS building provide free wi-fi, and that every GP practice should get 10 per cent of patients to go digital by 2017.

Mr Long, who is campaigning for fast broadband in rural areas of Somerset and Devon, said booking appointments and renewing prescriptions online could be beneficial for many people in rural areas, particularly those with poor public transport.

He said: “I live in the Blackdown Hills, and we had a bus service to the next village where there is a GP. That has been cut from five days a week to two. Ordering repeat prescriptions online would save an awful lot of travelling for people without their own transport. It has even been suggested that consultations could eventually be done online using Skype. But many people here would not be able to take advantage of this because of the slow speed connections.”

He added: “Fast broadband provides access to the trade routes of the 21st century. If you do not raise the urgency of deploying rural broadband, you will be consigning rural Devon and Somerset to Third World status.

“This should be one of the catalysts for getting fast broadband in rural areas. In the 21st century, it should all be about building fast broadband links. It is more important than improvements to the road network.”

Martyn Rogers, director of Age UK Exeter, said: “There are lots of people ordering prescriptions online now. It’s convenient because they can do it from home and it saves time and money at surgeries.

“But a government report last year on digital inclusion showed that 11 million people in this country don’t have sufficient digital capacity to do things like book appointments on line, and half of those were aged over 65.

“A lot of older people are not online. But I would encourage as many people as possible who want to do this to try it; it would seem to be cost-effective. Provided GPs are geared up, that’s great. But if it started to be mandatory, it would disenfranchise a large number of people.”

On Thursday (DEC 10) Mr Long addressed a full meeting of Devon County Council and raised the issue of the failure to provide fast broadband to many parts of the region.

He said: “Devon and Somerset’s superfast rural broadband programme, the largest in England, is now a basket case with district councils in Devon issuing press releases claiming they will run their own programme. Rural council taxpayers expect you to work with the districts to provide the publicly-funded infrastructure that cities and other rural counties now take for granted. This is not happening here and rural economies face serious decline with businesses moving out to the towns. Fast broadband provides access to the trade routes of the 21st century. If you do not raise the urgency of deploying rural broadband, you will be consigning rural Devon and Somerset to Third World status.”

http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk/Digital-divide-cost-rural-areas-access-NHS/story-28353010-detail/story.html

“Government planning reforms threaten to ‘destroy’ urban/rural boundaries”


“Boundaries preventing the spread of development across the South West countryside could be “destroyed” by proposed changes to national planning policy, campaigners have warned.

Members of the Campaign to protect Rural England (CPRE) claim the Government’s reforms would open up land around towns and villages to a “flood” of new planning applications.

They also argue they would make it harder for rural communities to push for the prioritisation of brownfield sites, while undermining local control over the wider planing process.

The criticisms from the campaign group come in response to a new Government consultation on plans to reform to the National Planning Policy Framework. The aim of the changes is to boost house building – thereby addressing the UK’s growing housing crisis – by simplifying and speeding up the planning process.

Policies outlined in the document include increasing development around so-called “commuter hubs”, creating up-to-date registers of brownfield sites for new housing, and freeing up “unviable” commercial land for discount starter homes. Ministers say these proposals will encourage the delivery of high quality new homes “that the country needs”.

However, some measures, including plans to loosen restrictions for development on Green Belt sites, have come under fire from conservation groups. And the CPRE has warned that even areas like Devon and Cornwall, which do not have Green Belts, will still be affected by reforms.

One policy in particular suggests that more consideration could be given to applications for small developments “adjacent” to settlement boundaries, which act as a dividing line between urban and non-urban areas. Matt Thomson, CPRE head of planning, said this could signal the end of clear cut barriers to the development of greenfield sites.

“Those boundaries have been drawn up with good intention, usually with the support of local people, to give them certainty about how development will or will not take place in their areas,” he said.

“While we recognise that there needs to be some development, this changes the established direction of planning policy…It would destroy those boundaries.

“It opens the floodgates to speculative developments because it’s raising the hope for people that they might be able to get a development on the edge of a village.

“We expect small towns and villages will be flooded with applications for these kinds of developments as a result.”

He added that while the charity supports the overall aim to tackle the lack of new housing in the UK, a focus on planning rather than the construction industry “never has the desired impact”. He also suggested that the Government should look to achieve some of its goals by empowering local communities, including through the use of neighbourhood plans.

This is a view shared by some councillors, who have expressed concern about the impact on local control of the planning process. North Devon District Council member Brian Greenslade said the reforms could see ministers “tighten the screws on local democratic decision taking”. This would be with a “very clear drive” to “open goalposts for developers” and render local planning authorities “impotent”, he added.

“With the economic recovery not making the progress the Government wants they will resort to the blunt instrument of housing development at any price to fuel growth,” he said. “They give no consideration whatever to the impact on established communities and the infrastructure provision needed to support large housing developments.

“There are unintended consequences for housing arising from what the Government seem to be proposing.”

Responding to some of the criticisms, a Department for Communities and Local Government spokesman said changes would give communities a bigger say in deciding where developments go.

He said: “No settlement will be imposed on local communities.

“These proposals are about delivering the homes local people have already agreed and have been tested through consultation and public examination.

“Local people now have a bigger say in deciding where developments should and shouldn’t go and what is needed in their area thanks to our planning reforms.”

Councils say the proposals still need “careful consideration” to fully understand their implications. East Devon District Council said it would seek members’ views before drawing up a response to the consultation, which closes on January 25.

The implications for affordable and starter homes

Government proposals to reclassify discount starter homes as affordable housing have been a growing source of concern in recent week, particularly among rural residents.

There are fears that the prioritisation of these properties over rented accommodation could see even more low income families priced out of the countryside.

These have been re-enforced by the Government’s new planning consultation, which suggests rural sites set aside for affordable housing should be used to deliver its home ownership strategy.

Critics have been quick to point out that with caps for starter homes set at £250,000, these properties will remain out of reach for many residents of rural Devon and Cornwall.

“The proposal for starter homes with a 20% discount is fool’s gold and will not assist many young local people to buy a home,” says North Devon councillor Brian Greenslade. “The very real need is for homes for rent because of the large gap between average incomes and average house prices.

“As a survey in the Western Morning News recently shows, people on average incomes in our area would need a pay increase of some 130% to get them to the point where they may get a mortgage.

“The Government’s ideas of selling off social housing just simply will make a difficult situation worse … Local young people are facing an appalling outlook for their housing needs.”

The consultation indicates that some councils could be granted powers to introduce a local connection test when allocating affordable homes in rural areas. This would allow local authorities to prioritise the needs of local residents in “exceptional” circumstances.

Matt Thomson of the Campaign to Protect Rural England is sceptical about whether this policy will make a significant difference.

“It’s a good idea in principle but they can be difficult to manage in practice,” he said. “These local connection tests are already used in other areas with patchy result – it is often difficult to prove local connection.

“Starter homes have a role where there is a large amount of young people who would like to own a home but can’t quite afford it,” he added. “But the problem is, once they’re bought and occupied, they’re no longer a starter home – there’s no affordability in perpetuity.”

http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk/Government-planning-reforms-threaten-destroy/story-28348092-detail/story.html

EDDC and Rural Broadband – the facts

Excellent analysis on the East Devon Alliance website of the current situation regarding the rural broadband situation now that EDDC has announced its intention to ” go it alone” and arrange its own coverage …

http://www.eastdevonalliance.org.uk/district-issues/rural-broadband/

Would that our majority-party councillors were so well- informed.

EDDC wants to manage its own rural broadband coverage … oh dear!

Has anyone seen the project below discussed or agreed on by district councillors – or is it yet another example of the EDDC CEO Mark Williams wagging the body of the councillor dog?

Is our multi-partner STRATA IT company behind this decision? Do they even know about it? Who knows – certainly not us!

And how does it affect EDDC’s relocation plans which lay great stress on broadband connectivity as the main way in which residents will access council services?

At last night’s EDDC Cabinet meeting in response to questions from the public asking why EDDC had not committed match funding to the Connecting Devon & Somerset (CDS) Phase 2 programme run by Devon & Somerset County Councils, a statement was read out which appears to that EDDC plans to withdraw from the CDS Phase 2 programme – at the moment the only council in Devon and Somerset that is doing this.

EDDC apparently plan to run their own project to provide predominantly Fibre To The Home broadband (FTTH) across all of the rural EDDC area that is not covered by the existing Phase 1 hcontract with BT.

Anyone who knows the saga of our ( still pending) Draft Local Plan – around seven years in discussion is allowed to groan at this point!

A letter sent by Mark Williams to BDUK, (the government body responsible for UK broadband subsidies), on November 24, appears to confirm this.

EDDC is hoping to tap some of the additional £10M that was announced in the Chancellors Autumn Statement to fund the project, but it remains to be seen how much of this money may come EDDC’s way since every other District and County in the South West can be expected to claim portions of this funding and when divided up, so EDDC’s allocation could be relatively small.

At this stage the statement should not be regarded as anything more than an “Expression of Interest” since a great deal of work will have to be done by EDDC before rural residents could expect to see the fruits of this initiative.

In the meantine, CDS, funded with up to £45.5M for Phase 2 are continuing in their third attempt to find Phase 2 suppliers for 95% coverage and are holding a “supplier day” which over 20 interested companies will attend on December 4 (see post on this by Ian Liddell-Grainger below) CDS say they intend to sign contracts with suppliers in June 2016.

It is likely that any 100% coverage programme that EDDC sets up will take significantly longer than this to put in place.

The full statement as read by Cllr Ian Thomas at last night’s EDDC Cabinet meeting:

‘The questions rightly identified the fact that up till now the matter of Superfast Broadband roll out had fallen within the remit of Connecting Devon & Somerset (CDS) joint venture set up by the County Councils) and their contractual arrangements with BT. EDDC had chosen not to be a contractual party to the matter because of the excessive secrecy surrounding the original contracts.

The issue of agreeing an ‘in principle contribution’ to the phase 2 roll out or making a ‘commitment’ was not just a matter of semantics. Without an open approach to discussions and an ability to share that information with communities, it would be irresponsible to commit funding – or in effect, give it away.

EDDC was committed to pursuing the matter on behalf of its communities and recently on 24 November, the Chief Executive wrote in the following terms to the Commercial Lead of Broadband Delivery UK:

“We are writing to confirm our intention to apply for support from the South West Fund for a project to provide superfast broadband to the remaining 10% of premises in East Devon District not otherwise covered by the CD&S/BT Phase 1 buildout.

We have been in discussion with potential suppliers for the past year on a possible co-investment arrangement whereby public and private funds would be applied to the construction of a predominantly FTTH network, and we find their proposals appealing and well worth supporting, both financially by way of co-investment by EDDC, and in ‘soft’ terms.

In the absence of an application form, we intend to address the various points raised in the guidelines by way of a paper to be submitted to EDDC Cabinet and to BDUK. In the meantime, we can confirm the Council’s intention to comply with mandatory criteria points 1-5 and priority criteria points 6-9, and to satisfy information requests a-d.
We look forward to working with BDUK on the successful initiation, funding approval and execution of this important and worthwhile project.”

A reply is awaited in order to commence the stage of preparing a detailed report. We also understand that CD&S are in discussions to try to ensure the delivery of their original objectives.’

Heart of the South West Local Enterprise Partnership – in their own words

This is the unelected and unaccountable body that wants to run Devon and Somerset

http://www.heartofswlep.co.uk/

and this is what it wants to do:

“Our ambition is to maximise our area’s assets and inspire innovation and entrepreneurship to create long-term economic growth. We want to see our urban centres fulfil their capacity for growth whilst ensuring that our rural areas flourish through enterprise and improved competitiveness.”

This is their ” vision” for our area:

http://www.heartofswlep.co.uk/current-priorities

This is what it is currently spending our money on:

http://www.heartofswlep.co.uk/current-activities

These are the unelected people running it:

http://www.heartofswlep.co.uk/chief-executive-and-non-executive-directors

including our own Paul Diviani, who will be in charge of housing for Devon and Somerset if this comes off (hope you won’t be needing a Devon and Somerset Local Plan guys) and Andrew Leadbetter (DCC councillor in charge of the rural broadband omnishambles).

Most of their current money (around £65m) has already been pledged to their favoured projects and most of the leg-work of who does what appears to have been pretty much sorted out.

Makes the East Devon Business Forum look like nursery school! Oh look, it has its own Business Forum:

http://www.heartofswlep.co.uk/heart-south-west-business-forum

Time to re-read “Brave New World” and “1984” Owl thinks!

Lobbying: dark art or vital part of democratic process?

Letter in Western Morning News from Justin Robbins, Yealmpton:

Your leading article on November 13 concerned the Countryside Land and Business Association and its new president Ross Murray, and it makes the outrageous claim that “in politics today lobbying ministers has gone from a dark art to a legitimate and indeed vital part of our democratic process.”

Surely the opposite is the case, lobbying ministers is still a dark art which is anti-democratic and potentially corrupting. It occurs behind closed doors so how can anyone assess its legitimacy?

It is hard to see how democratic principles apply to landowning in England and Wales where 33,000 CLA members own half the land. At a local level landowners have far more power than any elected representative, and their power is without any democratic accountability.

It is good to know that Mr Murray is concerned about the need for affordable rural homes (also WMN Nov 13). A major factor in the high cost of houses is the high cost of the land due to speculation and the way in which land value shoots up as soon as its use changes, through the planning system, from agricultural to residential, enabling landowners to gain hefty unearned profits. Profits that under a fairer system should revert to the community whose needs and activities serve to create the land’s value.

If Mr Murray could persuade his members to this view he would help solve the rural housing crisis. If not then Winston Churchill’s view will remain as true today as when he stated it over a century ago:

“Land monopoly is not the only monopoly but it is by far the greatest of the monopolies – it is a perpetual monopoly and it is the mother of all other forms of monopoly.”

http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk/WMN-Letters-Lobbying-dark-art/story-28197396-detail/story.html

“Broadband a question of haves and havenots”, Councillor Twiss told EDDC Scrutiny.

Report sent to East Devon Watch:

‘More ‘best practice’ was evident at EDDC Scrutiny Committee at Knowle yesterday evening (12/11/2015). From the start, Chair Roger Giles (Independent, Ottery St Mary) insisted that presentations should be brief and not include the reading out of information that had been circulated to councillors in advance. Using questions and answers was a more useful tool for this committee , he advised.
This proved correct straightaway, in the close examination of Devon’s broadband provision. Five stakeholders had been called to speak and answer questions. They were Andrew Moulding, Chair of Devon County Council’s (DCC) Place Scrutiny Committee and Deputy Leader of East Devon District Council (EDDC); Cllr Phil Twiss, EDDC Corporate Services portfolio holder; Paul Coles, BT Regional Manager, South West ; Phil Roberts, Programme Manager for superfast broadband delivery, Connecting Devon & Somerset (CDS) ; and Graham Long, Upottery Parish Councillor, with 20 years’ experience with Hewlett Packard, for whom he ran the EU support network.

Questions included one sent, in her absence, from Cllr Susie Bond (Independent, Feniton & Buckerell), asking why the broadband situation in parts of her constituency was “appalling”. Particularly intense questioning came from Cllrs Marianne Rixson (Independent, Sidmouth Sidford Ward ) , and Val Ranger (Independent, Newton Poppleford & Harpford),who had clearly done their homework, both closely referring to the document submitted by CDS, and finding some apparent inaccuracies (e.g. Could the audit done by EDDC’s internal auditors, SWAP, properly be described as ‘independent’?). Cllr Ranger wondered why, of 26 interested parties in 2014, only two had submitted a formal tender.
Phil Roberts (CDS) reported that CDS had decided not to sign a second contact with BT, and that there would now be a different approach to tendering . For the next phase, CDS were currently looking at other providers , as well as talking to BT, he said.

Much of the time, Cllrs Moulding and Twiss looked uncomfortably out of their depth, not least when it emerged that EDDC and DCC had not worked together to obtain maximum funding, thereby missing out on millions of pounds.

Graham Long, “astonished to find how slow broadband is in Devon”, explained that “Fibre is best for reliability, speed and bandwidth. But fibre-to-cabinet works as an urbancentric solution. It doesn’t work in rural areas”. Cllr Ben Ingham (Independent, Woodbury & Lympstone) told the Committee, “I’m really flabbergasted that BT are picking the poor relation of technology”.

The broadband issue is certain to continue. Next Monday DCC’s Place Scrutiny Committee will hear CDS feedback on its recommendations (14h00, County Hall, Exeter). More questions and answers are no doubt being prepared!’

Lib Dems appoint ” rural tsar” and target slow broadband

… Among the areas the Welsh MP believes to have been neglected under Conservative rule are community sustainability and digital connectivity. He says that despite many farmers and small businesses relying on broadband for their survival, speeds in Devon and Somerset, as well as other rural parts of Britain, are still too slow.

“The contrast between Devon and Somerset and Cornwall was quite startling,” he says. “The speeds were something like 80-90% in Cornwall, slipping down to 40% or 28% in Somerton and Frome, 42% in North Devon.

“We know these are challenges but these are economies that are dependent on that.”

Although he has already drawn up a list of priorities -incuding cuts to tourism VAT – Mr Williams says the results of the comprehensive spending review will be the true test of the Government’s commitment to rural communities. He joins fellow Lib Dems in predicting Defra funding will take a big hit.

“I just hope there isn’t a caricature that all is rosy in the proverbial garden of England, because that isn’t the case,” he says. “There is a lot of hardship, and there is still the blight of rural deprivation in large parts of Britain that needs to be addressed – and Defra has a role in doing that.

“That’s why our party is seeking and developing a strong rural narrative.”

http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk/EXCLUSIVE-Defra-failing-deliver-rural-communities/story-28020394-detail/story.html

Housing myths

Following on from the post below, here is an article from Simon Jenkins challenging myths about housing that appeared in the Guardian earlier this month:

“Here are the most damaging myths about the policy issue that’s on everyone’s lips – and a few brutal realities
Housing is Britain’s top policy issue. It is the “crisis” of our day. London’s mayoral elections, says Labour’s Sadiq Khan, should be a “referendum on the housing crisis”. The migration crisis, the NHS crisis and the poverty crisis all pale before its awesome might. So what is the “solution”?
There is no solution. As in all political crises, there are tribal myths and economic realities. When the myths win, policy degenerates into chaos and counterproductivity. First, let’s deal with the myths.

1 That there is a housing “crisis”. There is none. Too many people cannot find the house they want in London and the south-east, which is where most politicians and commentators live. This is inevitable where an economy is booming. Average prices in London may be £500,000, but in the north-west and north-east of England they are £150,000. You can get a decent home in Salford for £65,000.

2 That an average is a minimum. It is not. Housing hysteria is based on averages. When someone asks “How can I possibly afford £500,000?”, the answer is: you cannot, but somebody presumably can. But go on Zoopla and there are houses in parts of London for £180,000. Even the poorest newcomers seem to find somewhere (usually private) to rent.

3 That there is a national “need” for 250,000 new houses a year. For decades this has been Whitehall’s meaningless concept of “household formation”, taking no account of regional preference, propensity to move home, house prices or cost of finance. Housing need implies homelessness. It should refer to the 60,000 people currently in temporary accommodation, who ought to be the chief focus of policy attention. All else is “demand”.

4 That the solution to house prices lies in building more new houses. New houses are always worth building, where the infrastructure is in place. But new houses account for a mere 10th of housing transactions. The chief determinant of house prices is the state of the market in existing property and the cost of finance. During the sub-prime period, prices soared in America and Australia despite unrestricted new building. It was cheap money that did the damage. The house-builders lobby equates housing to “new build” because that is where their interest lies.

5 That the solution lies in the green belt. This is an anti-ruralist’s version of myth four. Even were the green belt obsolete, which few accept, or partly so (which I accept), it will not dent the pressure of overall demand. Nor is sprawl remotely “sustainable” development. It requires new infrastructure and puts more pressure on roads and commuting. It is bad planning.

6 That high buildings are the answer. They are inefficient as the higher you build the more is spent on servicing. London’s most popular and economic housing is “high density/low rise”. Towers have supplied mostly empty pads for the rich, housing no one.

7 That the answer lies in new social housing. Security of tenure and low turnover – not to mention right to buy – renders the fixed stock of public housing inflexible and immobile. Increasingly it has become a generous donation by the taxpayer to a fortunate few, for life. It is largely irrelevant to acute homelessness.

8 That people have a “right” to live where they or their parents lived before. Localities benefit from stable populations, but conferring and bequeathing such a right to discriminatory subsidy is in no book of rights.

9 That there is also a “right” to home ownership. The state has a housing obligation for those who need help. Home ownership is capital accumulation, developed out of the Tories’ mortgage tax relief as a form of saving for old age and to endow offspring. It promotes inequality and cannot be termed a right.

10 That renting is stupid. Renting is buying a service. About 60% of Germans rent. They do not think of buying until their 40s. Booming Berlin has 90% of its population renting. Renting aids labour mobility and channels savings into productive investment. As a result, Germany has little house price inflation and no “ladder” advantage to owning not renting.

11 That buy to let is evil. The poorest people rent from the private sector. The more houses are available to rent, the more flexible is the housing stock and the lower are rents for those who do not buy. Whether buyers-to-let should enjoy tax breaks and whether rents should be regulated are quite different matters.

Facing these myths stand a few realities.

1 There is no “need” to build on rural land outside cities. Jobs, leisure and infrastructure are available in cities. We should not aid hypermobility with sprawl. Every city, in de-industrialising, leaves empty sites stuck in planning arguments or delayed decontamination. The London agents Stirling Ackroyd have identified sites for 500,000 houses in London without touching the green belt. People may like houses in the countryside, but that is preference not need.

2 The one massive reservoir of vacant residential property in Britain is under-occupied property and underdeveloped city land. London is awash with small houses and empty rooms, its residential density the lowest of any big city in Europe. Detached houses, spare rooms and gardens are the nation’s luxury. Britons had 1.5 rooms per person in 1981 and have 2.5 today, even as new housebuilding is declining. Freeing up this capacity should be the overwhelming goal of policy.

3 Tax makes it worse, not better. VAT discriminates in favour of new building and against the conversion of existing properties. Stamp duty is a tax on transactions, and thus on downsizing and more efficient use of space. Council tax is wildly regressive, promoting wasted space. Inheritance tax relief rewards hoarding.

4 Planning control is too strict. Permitting an extra storey, apartment or back extension on every existing property would drastically increase density and capacity. London can grow higher without growing high.

5 The most effective way to relieve housing poverty is through housing benefit, at present chaotically administered. Cash payments are more flexible and fit for purpose. They should extend to a new “public sector Airbnb”, geared to bringing vacancies to market.

6 The only way to force down rents and house prices in the south is to strain every policy sinew to make London poorer and the regions richer. That seems too radical for anyone.”

Simon Jenkins
The Guardian, Thursday 1st October 2015

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/sep/30/housing-crisis-policy-myth-realities

Extended right-to-buy will harm rural communities say CPRE and housing associations

Organisations across the South West are today urging the Government to protect affordable homes in rural areas from new plans that would worsen the countryside ‘housing crisis’.

They say extending the right-to-buy to cover social housing will hit the countryside disproportionately hard.

The Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE), the County Land and Business Association (CLA) and the National Parks Association are among those calling for a complete exemption for countryside areas.

“We are very concerned that the stock of affordable housing, built up over many years, will be lost,” said Dr Nigel Stone chief executive of Exmoor National Park Authority.

The policy looks set to be implemented voluntarily by housing associations under a proposal put forward by the National Housing Federation.

The plan would mean that there would be a presumption in favour of sale in most circumstances but housing associations would retain some discretion.

But the rural groups have now called for a total exemption for countryside areas.

The organisations, also including the Hastoe Housing Group, National Association of Local Councils, Action with Communities in Rural England, and the Rural Services Network, said a “portable discount” offered to tenants would not help rural areas.

They also warned landowners would be reluctant to offer land for social housing if there are no guarantees it will remain affordable and not be sold on within a few years. The groups said that 8% of rural housing was classed as affordable, compared with 20% in towns and cities.

Without a comprehensive rural exemption, this measure will make it harder to sustain mixed communities and local services such as shops and pubs, they said. …”

http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk/Right-buy-rules-worse-rural-housing-crisis/story-27919706-detail/story.html

Rural crime “virtually abandoned by police”

Crime in rural parts of England and Wales cost more than £800m last year.

The National Rural Crime Network found some crimes were not reported in these areas.

Local councillor John Blackie told the BBC they feel “virtually abandoned” by the police.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34254409

“BT hasn’t put the money into broadband because it hasn’t been forced to …”

… “A big contract in Devon and Somerset collapsed in June because BT’s “best offer” didn’t match the council’s need for 95% coverage. So who else will step up? For now, nobody. Does BT lose out? No. It doesn’t have an incentive to add more, despite any pent-up demand.” …

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/sep/14/bt-broadband-fibre-optic-slow-speeds

Businesses without broadband not allowed to give evidence to DCC Scrutiny Committee which is chaired by Councillor Andrew Moulding

Remind yourself, when you read this article, that Councillor Moulding said the following about consultation when Axminster Hospital’s beds were threatened:

“At a well attended meeting to discuss progress in the fight to maintain in-patient beds at Axminster hospital, Cllr Andrew Moulding (wearing both his Town and County councillor hats) spoke to concerned residents about his representations to the Devon CC Health and Wellbeing OSC. He made clear his feelings on the matter to the OSC and stated that his only job as a Councillor was to convey the feelings, views, anger and frustration of Axminster people over the shameful way in which the CCG and NDHT had conducted themselves, with misleading figures, loaded and biased consultations and the heavy-handed (and expensive) use of lawyers to force a decision through…

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2015/01/30/to-a-louse-with-particular-reference-to-councillor-moulding-axminster-hospital-and-knowle-relocation/

Whereas here, he seems to have totally forgotten what he said:

Business leaders have spoken of their disappointment and “frustration” that the pleas of thousands of local companies to give evidence in a pending broadband inquiry have not yet been acknowledged.

Members of Devon County Council’s scrutiny committee are due to hold a meeting to discuss handling of the Connecting Devon and Somerset (CDS) superfast broadband programme next week.

Officials initially decided to invite only those close to the programme to give evidence – which sparked a campaign by residents and businesses to include external witnesses.

Organisations representing 19,500 firms across the two counties issued an open letter to the committee, urging it to reconsider its decision. But the newly published agenda for the meeting reveals arrangements currently remain the same.

Graham Long, chairman of the Broadband for Rural Devon and Somerset action group, said the inquiry threatened to become a “whitewash” if only those involved in the roll-out scheme are allowed to speak.

“Rural businesses and residents cannot plan their future with the uncertainty that now exists around their broadband service, and the scrutiny committee should hear from the organisations that have added their names to the open letter,” he said.

“The failure to secure a phase two contract means that Devon and Somerset are now the only English counties without a programme to provide a minimum of 95% superfast coverage.

“This is now an urgent issue and the digital apartheid that exists between the towns and cities where fast broadband is ubiquitous and rural areas where it is almost non-existent cannot be allowed to continue.”

The committee scheduled a “special” meeting for September 3 following the collapse of negotiations between CDS and BT for delivery of phase two of the Government’s superfast scheme.

The only individuals listed to give evidence on the formal agenda are representatives of BDUK, CDS and BT, members of the council, local MPs and the broadband provider Airband.

The open letter, submitted to last week, warns councillors this approach “will not produce a fair examination of the programme” and calls for affected businesses and residents to be heard. Signatories include the Devon and Somerset branches of the Federation of Small Businesses, the NFU, the Country Land and Business Association and the Blackdown Hills Business Association.

Development manager for Devon FSB, Sue Wilkinson, described the situation as “frustrating”. “It’s disappointing for our members and all businesses in Devon and Somerset that chance for us to have a fair hearing and to make our very valid points has been lost,” she said.

The chairman of the committee, Conservative councillor Andrew Moulding was unavailable to comment yesterday. However, vice chairman and Liberal Democrat councillor Gordon Hook said he believed residents should be free to “question and probe” the issue.

A council spokesman said a decision on whether or not to take representations from the public would be made when coun. Moulding was available.

http://www.westernmorningnews.co.uk/Businesses-ongoing-frustration-exclusion-council/story-27689551-detail/story.html

Talaton planning refusal will affect many other communities in East Devon

Two planning applications for 10 and 25 houses in Talaton have been refused on appeal. It is best to read the full document (see link below) for how it might affect YOUR community.

Basically, although the Inspector had a LOT to say about how he did not trust EDDC’s figures on 5 year land supply or its planning abilities in general particularly with regard to Cranbrook, the unsuitability of the suggested S106 option of village hall extra parking, the lack of sustainability AND Talaton’s nearness (within 10 km) of the Pebblebed Heath weighed heavily in his decision:

30. From the information in front of me, the Council has not demonstrated that previous under delivery has been accounted for within its five-year supply calculations. Even if the previous under-delivery has been accounted for within the estimated need of 17,100 identified within the SHMA, which is not certain, the way in which the Council have addressed the previous under-supply is not consistent with the aim of addressing it within the first five years, where possible. In the Council’s projection the 17,100 has been split evenly over the plan period, ‘the ‘Liverpool’ method. Whilst the PPG is not prescriptive in stating that any under-deliver must be recovered within the first five years it sets a clear preference for this approach, ‘where possible’. No evidence was presented by the Council to suggest that it would not be possible to recover any previous under-supply over the next five years and the Local Plan Inspector has previously written to the Council to advocate the ‘Sedgefield’ approach with the aim of boosting housing supply.

31. Moreover, I have concerns that the projected delivery rates for the new settlement at Cranbrook are not supported by clear evidence. The predicted completion rate for the two phases of the development over each of the following five years is 467 dwellings per annum. However, the March 2015 HMU identifies that there had been 757 completions between ‘summer’ 2012 and August 2014. It is not clear when development commenced but the published completion rate suggests a figure in the region of 350 to 375 dwellings per year over the two year period. The Council suggested orally at the Hearing that there is evidence to suggest that delivery rates are likely to increase but no firm evidence was submitted to show how the predicted delivery rates had been derived. In effect, those predictions show an increase of approximately 100 dwellings a year at the site, over and above the published rate of completion to date. That rate of delivery is not supported by the evidence presented to me.

I conclude that the location of the site is such that the proposed developments would result in unsustainable travel patterns resulting in an increase in the use of the private car. The harm resulting from those unsustainable travel patterns would be comparatively greater for the proposed development in Appeal B due to the greater number of dwellings in that scheme. Both proposals would be contrary to the requirements of policy TA1 of the LP and policy TC2 of the ELP, which state that new development should be located so as to be accessible by pedestrians, cyclists and public transport and well related to compatible uses to as to minimise the need to travel by car.

the proposed car park [for the village hall] is not directly, or even indirectly, related to the impact of the proposed scheme and is not necessary because of it. Thus, the offer to provide the car park is not a matter that I can take into account in reaching my decision, having regard to paragraph 204 of the Framework and regulation 122 of the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations (2010). Whether an individual landowner or developer chooses to offer the car park to the Parish Council is a matter for their consideration. It is not a factor that can be taken into account in reaching my decision.

…The appeal sites are within a 10km radius of the Pebblebed Heaths SAC/SPA. The Council have referred to the South East Devon European Site Mitigation Strategy10 (the Mitigation Strategy) which identifies that planned residential and tourist accommodation development within that radius would, in combination, have a detrimental effect on the integrity of the SAC/SPA, as a result of increased recreational pressure within the designated SAC/SPA boundaries. Both main parties agree that mitigation is necessary in order to off-set the harm caused by the proposed developments and clause 3.3 of the s.106 agreements in relation to both proposals indicates that planning permission should be refused in the absence of the proposed mitigation11. Based upon the findings of the Mitigation Strategy I concur with that view.

Paragraph 7 of the Framework identifies three dimensions of sustainable development, based on economic, social and environmental factors. The Framework identifies that these strands are mutually dependent and should not be considered in isolation. In this case, the village is not in a sustainable location in terms of its proximity to shops, services and employment opportunities. Future residents would be largely reliant upon the private car. That reliance would not foster a move towards a low carbon economy and would be contrary to the environmental dimension of sustainable development.

The full document is HERE13.1832 & 1833.mout

Changes to neighbourhood plan procedures

The Government is to make it easier for villages to establish neighbourhood plans and allocate land for new homes, ministers have announced.

The Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne, and the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Elizabeth Truss, said this would include the use of rural exception sites to deliver ‘Starter Homes’.

A ten-point plan aimed at boosting rural productivity said: “Through the right combination of measures, the government wants to ensure that any village in England has the freedom to expand in an incremental way, subject to local agreement.”

Other proposals in the plan include:

In the current bidding round for Enterprise Zones, which closes on 18 September, preference will be given to proposals involving smaller towns, districts and rural areas;

A government review will be undertaken of planning and regulatory constraints facing rural businesses and measures that can be taken to address them by 2016;

A fast-track planning certificate process will be introduced for establishing the principle of development for minor development proposals;

Encouragement will be given to further proposals from local areas for devolution of powers “in return for strong and accountable local governance”;

Permitted development rights will be extended to taller mobile masts subject to conclusions from the Call for Evidence which closes on 21 August 2015;

There will be fairer funding for schools, including those in rural areas. “It will turn inadequate schools into academies and focus efforts to support school improvement in underperforming rural areas.”

The document, Towards a one nation economy: A 10-point plan for boosting productivity in rural areas, can be viewed here.

http://www.localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=24138:ministers-to-make-it-easier-for-villages-to-establish-neighbourhood-plans&catid=63&Itemid=31