Swire goes back to the Maldives

It is SO heartening to see Swire standing up for democracy … in the Maldives … again … and again … and again

“Oral Answers to Questions – Foreign and Commonwealth Office: Topical Questions (20 Feb 2018)

https://www.theyworkforyou.com/debates/?id=2018-02-20a.16.7&s=speaker%3A11265#g20.0

Hugo Swire: The recent extension of the state of emergency and the arrest of former President Gayoom and two Supreme Court judges has shown President Yameen tightening the grip in the Maldives and the further extinguishing of the democratic institutions there. Given the fact that at any one time there are literally thousands of British holidaymakers on those islands, and that until recently the Maldives…”

Consultation by Parliament should be more than asking people for their views then ignoring them

Concluding paragraph of article

“The analysis of the UK Parliament’s attempt to integrate the public’s voice into the legislative process shows, therefore, that while the public’s view may enhance the understanding of the consequences of a bill and therefore enhance its scrutiny, this in itself does not constitute effectiveness. In order to have a greater impact on legislation, its integration needs to be thought through as something more integral to the legislative process rather than simply sitting in parallel with it. Integrating the public’s view directly into representative institutions requires a very careful consideration of their role and of the processes in place to facilitate it and to maximise its effect on scrutiny.”

http://www.democraticaudit.com/2018/02/21/engaging-the-public-with-the-scrutiny-of-legislation-requires-more-than-just-asking-for-their-views/

“Find out if your local councillor is being wined and dined”

Of course, the complication we have in East Devon is that several of our district councillors are, or have been, in the “hospitality trade” as Owl has pointed out in the past:

https://eastdevonwatch.org/2016/05/19/when-does-private-become-public-and-public-become-private-a-very-fine-line/

“The timeless practice of “gastronomic pimping”, as Nye Bevan put it, is a tool long used by commercial lobbyists to curry favour. These “meetings” are deliberately social occasions designed to create bonds, establish shared values and ultimately influence council decisions.

Robert Davis, the most wined and dined politician in Britain while he was chairman of Westminster council’s planning committee, was entertained 150 times by property industry figures in three years. But hospitality is not the only tool in the property lobbyist’s box. One of the surest ways to access and influence the officials you seek to influence is to employ people who know local government inside out. Councillors up and down the country are employed in the property lobbying business. They are elected to represent the public interest and at the same time employed by developers seeking to influence the public sphere.

Full list of Westminster councillor Robert Davis’s 514 freebies
Take one of the scores of firms in this business, which claims to have “won successful planning consents for over 20 years”. It employs numerous local councillors, including one who sits on a council planning committee, as well as prospective and former councillors, plus a former council leader. These people not only understand how decisions are made, but in many cases are the decision-makers themselves. This is valuable for any developer needing council backing.

Besides trying to ensure that elected officials are onside with their clients’ development plans, these planning lobbyists also deal with any resistance from local communities. Developers have a statutory duty on large projects to consult with communities. Consultation, however, in the hands of lobbyists, is a tool that serves to draw out community opposition and provide it with a managed channel through which to voice concerns, but with no hope of tangibly changing the outcome. As the ex-Tesco lobbyist Bernard Hughes explained: “Businesses have to be able to predict risk and gain intelligence on potential problems. The army used to call it reconnaissance; we call it consultation.”

What do developers want from their relationships? It may be straightforward planning permission; or relief from paying a tax used to fund local amenities; or an agreement with the council on the amount of affordable homes the developer has, or doesn’t have, to provide. All of which can be, and is, negotiated by the councils upon which such lavish hospitality is poured.

That the “local lobbying” industry has got away with such practices for so long is no surprise. It lacks the one thing necessary to drive them out – scrutiny. As Davis says in his defence, all his meetings with developers “were all properly declared and open to anyone to examine”. But people need to have a proper look at what is happening in their council. Take a look at the registers of interests to see if any of your councillors double up as lobbyists. Get hold of the registers of hospitality and see if they are taking from the developers they should be overseeing. Use freedom of information law to dig deeper into who is meeting whom, and what they are seeking to do, and then hand the information to your local paper.

Until a light is shone on these relationships they will continue to flourish, and we will continue to get developments that serve no one but the investors and developers.”

• Tamasin Cave is co-author of A Quiet Word and a campaigner with Spinwatch

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/feb/21/local-councillors-lobbying-entertainment

A planning committee chairman, a developer and his “viability consultant” walk into a bar …

Read the rest of the sleazy story and marvel at the fact that the City of Westminster’s planning committee appears to have just FOUR members …

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/feb/20/robert-davis-the-councillor-meets-the-property-mogul

Greendale Business Centre: FWS Carter and Sons application fails at the High Court

PRESS RELEASE:

“After 3 years challenging the planning system, Greendale Business Park owners are required to return an area back to Agricultural use.

It may have taken 3 years but finally the Planning Department at East Devon District Council (EDDC) has succeeded in winning a long running planning and legal challenge.

It was the 8th Feb 2015 when earth moving and general building works were first reported to EDDC Enforcement Officers by neighbours of Greendale Business Park. This was on a 3.5Ha site, east of the existing permitted development area at the Business Park near the village of Woodbury Salterton.

Following investigation, the Local Planning Authority (EDDC) served an Enforcement Notice to the owners FWS Carter and Sons, but they chose to ignore the notice and carried on developing the site at “their own risk”.

A planning application was submitted nine months later (06/11/2015 15/2592/MOUT) but the development was considered to lie outside the agreed development area for Greendale Business Park and it was refused by EDDC. A second attempt was made with a similar proposal split into 2 separate planning applications the following December but this was also refused (06/12/2016 16/2597/FUL and 16/2598/MFUL).

The Local Planning Authority then issued the owners with an Enforcement Notice, requesting the removal of the industrial concrete hardstanding, fences, buildings and the return of the land to agricultural use. The company then appealed to the Government’s Planning Inspectorate in March 2017 for the decision to be revoked.

on Dec 7th, 2017 the Inspector found in favour of the Local Authority and upheld their enforcement decision, but within days the Company lodged an appeal with the High Court. Last week 08/02/2018 the Judge ruled that there was no case to answer and therefore the decision by the Local Authority was upheld and costs of £3998 was set against the applicants, FWS Carter and Sons.

The Company now has 6 months to remove all industrial activity and return the land to agricultural use. This work will be monitored very closely

Another section of the Business Park (an area approximately 1Ha) south of the Greendale Business Park and just off Hogsbrook Lane, has also been developed without planning consent. The owners FWS Carter and Sons claimed in Oct 2017 that this land has been in “unlawful” industrial use for more than 10 years and they applied for a little-known planning regulation loophole known as a “Certificate of Lawfulness ” (17/2441/CPE) to enable the area to continue to be used without requiring further planning approval.

However, the Local Planning Authority followed Legal Advice and concluded that the land had not been used “unlawfully” for 10 years because there was lawful permitted development with a gas pipeline contractor occupying the site for 3 years. Because of this, the Certificate of Lawfulness was refused and it is expected that an Enforcement Notice will be served on the Company for this breach of planning shortly.

Councillor Geoff Jung, EDDC Ward Councillor for Raleigh Ward which includes Greendale Business Park says, “It is a great shame that the Company started to develop this area prior to any planning permission being in place. The efforts and costs incurred by the company in developing the site, including the cost of architects, planning consultants, barristers, solicitors, court costs, contractors’ costs and everyone’s time has all been wasted.”

“Add to that the considerable costs to the local authorities` planning, enforcement and legal teams in endeavouring to provide a sound and fair case.”

“It’s quite clear the Planning System has moved on enormously in the last 15 years, with much more openness and clarity, mainly down to modern technology. Planning applications and official documents are now open to scrutiny at the touch of a button and can be viewed without leaving your house.”

“Previously documents were available only at District and Town Halls, for interested parties to view but now the internet and Local Authority Planning Portals provide everyone with a better understanding of the planning regulations and legal issues involved.”

“I look forward to the day when all developers will follow the normal planning procedures and not proceed in such a cavalier way. This may have been the way it was done in the past but its proving much more difficult now.”

“I would like to thank the many local people who have frequently written to the Planning Authority to comment whenever it was required, as well as the Planning and Legal Team at East Devon District Council who ensured that the Planning Regulations were correctly upheld”

So, how is EDDC’s office relocation going? Update and some odd figures

With the new barn-like EDDC HQ taking shape in Honiton, how is the project going? How much has it cost so far? What is the current projected cost?

Hard to say. Owl searched for news of the “Office Relocation Project Executive Group” and was directed to its website:

http://eastdevon.gov.uk/council-and-democracy/committees-and-meetings/other-panels-and-forums/office-relocation-project-executive-group/

where readers are told to consult the project archive:

http://eastdevon.gov.uk/access-to-information/historical-information/relocation-project-documentation-archive/project-document-archive/

Alas, the last document posted there was on 20 February 2013 (in response to the requirement of the Information Tribunal which EDDC lost) and Owl’s attempt to find anything more up-to-date (including current costings and financing arrangements) has so far failed.

Perhaps an EDDC councillor or officer can let Owl know where the latest information is – and who is in charge of the project these days?

Well, officers and councillors must read this blog! I have been pointed to ANOTHER website (thanks):

http://eastdevon.gov.uk/access-to-information/historical-information/relocation-project-documentation-archive/

and here is the latest update:

http://eastdevon.gov.uk/access-to-information/historical-information/relocation-project-documentation-archive/

Archive 8 states on 18 October 2017:

“Progress – going well. Costs remain within budget allowances. Spend to date is £3.745,000 leaving a balance of £6,840,148m.”

and on 15 November 2017:

“Progress – going well. Costs remain within budget allowances. Spend
to date is £1.403m leaving a balance of £6.482m with a contingency of £245,000. Completion date is scheduled for 15 October 2018 with a relocation date of 21 December.”

Click to access joint-project-exec-and-officer-wkg-group-minutes-151117.pdf

Now – Can anyone explain the discrepancy? £3,745,000 spent to date in October 2017 and £1,403,000 to date a month later?

“Audit committee calls for review of threshold for misconduct in public office offences”

Again, plenty Owl could might add here!

“The chair of a local authority’s audit and risk assurance committee has written to the Home Secretary, Amber Rudd, and the Director of Public Prosecutions, Alison Saunders, to express concern at the “extremely high threshold” for consideration of Misconduct in Public Office offences.

The letter sent by Cllr Liam Preece of Sandwell Metropolitan Borough came after the local authority had referred certain allegations about some elected members to the police.

However, the police – following a review of the evidence held by the council – reached a determination that there was insufficient evidence to meet the threshold for recording a crime.

Cllr Preece said that the audit and risk assurance committee had accepted the police’s decision, “but were ultimately concerned that there is an extremely high threshold for consideration of Misconduct in Public Office offences which in turn could lead to a lack of public confidence in the process”.

He added in the letter, which can be viewed here, that the committee hoped that the relevant guidance issued to police forces in relation to the threshold criteria for such offences could be reviewed.

“The Committee feel that in cases of multiple serious breaches of the code of conduct, the police should feel more justified to bring charges against elected members to restore and maintain public confidence,” Cllr Preece told the DPP.”

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=34242%3Aaudit-committee-calls-for-review-of-threshold-for-misconduct-in-public-office-offences&catid=59&Itemid=27

“Westminster councillor received gifts and hospitality 514 times in three years”

Surely not the only one. So many councillors in Devon accept such hospitality …..particularly at sporting events …..

Full list of this councillor’s freebies here:
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/feb/19/full-list-of-westminster-councillor-robert-daviss-514-freebies

“Westminster city council’s deputy leader has emerged as a contender for the title of the most schmoozed politician in Britain, receiving entertainment, meals and gifts more than 500 times in the last three years.

From tickets to the hottest West End shows to exclusive dinners in London’s finest restaurants and trips to the south of France, the official declarations reveal an extraordinary lifestyle that included one day in Mallorca, when Robert Davis managed two lunches, the first at the home of Andrew Lloyd Webber and the second at the home of the Earl of Chichester.

Davis, the Conservative deputy leader of the central London borough and until last year the chairman of its powerful planning committee, was entertained by and received gifts from property industry figures at least 150 times since the start of 2015 – a rate of almost once a week.

His entertainment was paid for by some of the country’s wealthiest property developers including Gerald Ronson, Sir Stuart Lipton and Sir George Iacobescu, the chief executive of Canary Wharf Group.

The Cambridge-educated solicitor was entertained or received gifts on 514 occasions since the start of 2015, suggesting he received benefits worth at least £13,000 although then overall total is likely to be several times higher.

Councillors must declare gifts and hospitality worth £25 or more, but some of the hospitality would have been worth much more. For example, property developers twice flew Davis to the south of France and put him up for four-day stays.

He was also gifted a ticket to the musical Hamilton by the impresario Cameron Mackintosh, which can cost as much as £250. Steaks at the M steakhouse, where he dined 20 times at others’ expense cost up to £100 each. Other property figures treated him to lunch at exclusive restaurants including Sexy Fish, Scott’s, the Colony Grill Room, the Ritz and the Ivy.

Davis was entertained 15 times at the expense of the Westminster Property Association, which represents major developers, including an expenses-paid trip to the south of France and dinners at the Grosvenor House and Goring Hotels in London.

Labour said the extent of Davis’s register of interests was evidence of a “broken culture at Westminster council” and said there was a “clear perception that senior Conservative councillors have a very close relationships with developers”. It has accused the council of letting developers get away with building far fewer “affordable” homes than required under Westminster’s planning policy.

Between 2013 and 2016 only 12% of the new homes built in Westminster were classed as “affordable” while the target was 35%. Davis chaired the council’s planning committee, which approves deals with developers over how much affordable housing they must build as part of private developments, between 2000 and January 2017. …

… a spokesman for Westminster city council hit back saying: “The idea that any councillor has been ‘bought’ by the property lobby is demonstrably untrue.”

“Westminster is a target for investment for UK and national developers, so it is hardly surprising that the chair of planning for Westminster city council – the largest planning authority in the UK – undertakes a large number of meetings,” he said. “Where hospitality is offered, these meetings are all declared in the register of interests and have absolutely no sway on planning decisions.”

Davis added: “As planning chairman it was an important part of my job to meet groups ranging from developers to residents, property agents, heritage associations, arts groups and trade organisations. These meetings were all properly declared and open to anyone to examine. Their sole purpose was to ensure and encourage the right kind of development in Westminster and ensure that anything put before the council was going to benefit the city as a whole.”

The records show Davis also dined with several planning consultancy companies whose job it is to help their clients secure planning consent. When he was chairman of the planning committee he was given breakfast at the Carlton Club in St James by the consultancy Thorncliffe which boasts on its website: “We get clients planning committee approval.”

There is no suggestion that Davis breached any rules.

Davis’s declared entertainment dwarves that of the leaders of his own council and the neighbouring Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea. The current leader of Westminster, Nickie Aiken, has registered only nine instances of gifts or hospitality for the first half of 2017. Nick Paget-Brown, the leader of the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea until the Grenfell tower disaster, recorded 43 instances since the start of 2015.

Hug said the extent of the entertainment Davis received during some periods was “ludicrous”.

On one day, while in Mallorca during August 2015, he registered two lunches: the first at the home of Madeleine Lloyd Webber, Andrew Lloyd Webber’s third wife, and the second at the home of the Earl of Chichester.

The property developers that entertained or gave gifts to Davis include: the Crown Estate (13 times), Clivedale Properties, Capco, Irvine Sellar, Derwent London, Berkeley Homes, British Land, Land Securities, Grosvenor Estates, Soho Estates, Dukelease. Architects included Zaha Hadid, Make, Terry Farrell, Michael Squire and John McAslan.

There is no suggestion of wrongdoing on the part of Davis or any other named individual.

Davis was also gifted seats at 10 theatre shows at the expense of the impresario Cameron Mackintosh and a further 51 performances at venues including the Royal Opera House and the Regent’s Park open air theatre. In 2016 he was entertained at the expense of Harvey Weinstein at the after-party for the Bafta awards.

Since January he has been in charge of council policy on theatres and major public realm schemes.

Labour said that if elected to run Westminster council in May’s elections its councillors will not accept hospitality from individual developers or their agents.”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/feb/19/westminster-councillor-received-gifts-and-hospitality-514-times-in-three-years

Auditers – what are the good for? Papering over cracks?

“Carillion’s investors fled the failing company as it headed for disaster, according to MPs.

The construction firm’s annual reports were a worthless guide to its financial health and raise major questions about corporate governance, the MPs say.

The comments come in a joint report published on Monday by the Work and Pensions and Business committees.

Carillion’s former auditor, KPMG, will be questioned by MPs on Thursday.
Britain’s second largest construction company collapsed last month, with the loss of almost 1,000 jobs. There were also job cuts and widespread disruption among sub-contractors. …

… Frank Field, chairman of the Work and Pensions Committee, said there was a “disconnect” between what Carillion directors told MPs and the information from shareholders.

“On one hand, the Carillion directors told us all was sunny” until a major contract in Qatar went wrong.

“On the other hand, investors were fleeing for the hills, and it appears those who looked closest ran fastest,” Mr Field said.

It has emerged that one leading investor – Kiltearn Partners – considered suing Carillion. …

Rachel Reeves, who chairs the Business Committee, said: “Investors spotted that Carillion was heading for disaster and fled.

“The company had unsustainably high levels of debt, weak cash-generation and was saddled with a widening pensions Rachel Reeves, who chairs the Business Committee, said: “Investors spotted that Carillion was heading for disaster and fled.

“The company had unsustainably high levels of debt, weak cash-generation and was saddled with a widening pensions deficit.

Carillion’s annual reports were worthless as a guide to the true financial health of the company.”

She said the fact that it was impossible to get a true sense of Carillion’s financial health “raises serious” corporate governance issues.

“KMPG will have to explain why they signed-off on accounts which appeared to bear so little relation to reality,” Ms Reeves said. …

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-43107500

240 councils have taken out high-risk “toxic” loans

“A cash-strapped council which has banned all new spending is currently repaying £150m in “toxic” loans.

Northamptonshire County Council has invoked the ban on expenditure as it faces a £21m overspend for 2017-18. It said it would cost more than a quarter of a billion pounds to immediately repay the LOBO – or Lender Option Borrower Option – loans, described by critics as “risky”.

A council spokesman said “interest rate risk is inherent” in all borrowing.
The county council has a total of 19 LOBO loans, which are unregulated and typically spread over 40 to 70 years. They were used to meet expenditure on highways, infrastructure, schools and other such assets.

The authority said said it would cost £256m to repay them straight away.

Critics say the repayments would be better spent on under threat services such as bus subsidies and Trading Standards. Joel Benjamin, from campaign group Debt Resistance UK, called the loans “toxic”. He said the county council has “fallen victim to a lethal cocktail of cuts”, poorly run shared-services and “high interest, risky LOBO borrowing.” Financial expert Abhishek Sachdev said LOBOs “contained huge quantifiable risk at the outset”.

Mr Sachdev, who gave evidence about LOBOs to the Communities & Local Government Select Committee in 2015, added: “There is a reason why none of our large PLC corporate clients would ever enter into such a loan.”
Freedom of Information requests by Debt Resistance UK show around 1,000 LOBO loans have been taken out across 240 local authorities.

The figures show these have a face value of £15bn, while Mr Sachdev estimated it would cost about £26bn to exit them straight away.”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-northamptonshire-42977061

“Government spent £108m in failed attempts to stop people’s disability benefits” (to which they were entitled)

And how are they going to fix this? By employing 190 more officers!!!

“The Government has spent £108million in two years trying to prevent disabled people claiming benefits they are entitled to, it has emerged.

Freedom of Information requests have revealed how much taxpayers’ cash has been spent on unsuccessful legal battles to prevent vulnerable people receiving help.

The Department for Work and Pensions spent £108.1million on appeals against disability benefits in just two years, new figures reveal, reports The Mirror.

Neil Heslop, chief executive of disability charity Leonard Cheshire, said: “To spend this amount on admin fighting to uphold flawed decisions that shouldn’t have been made in the first place is staggering. “Thousands of disabled individuals have had to fight to receive support to which they are legally entitled.” …

The monthly cost has been steadily rising and in December the DWP spent £5.3million on mandatory reconsiderations and appeals for PIP and ESA.

The equivalent figure for October 2015 was £2million.

Since October 2015, 87,500 PIP claimants had their decision changed at mandatory reconsideration, while 91,587 claimants won their appeals at tribunal.

In the first six months of 2017/18 some 66% of 42,741 PIP appeals went in the claimant’s favour. …

A DWP spokeswoman said it was working to improve the process, including recruiting around 190 officers who will attend PIP and ESA appeals to provide feedback on decisions.

“Financial Peer Review Northamptonshire County Council”

Northamptonshire County Council is effectively bankrupt. This is a peer review report if their financial situation last year. Some worrying similarities!

Some lessons for officers and councillors.

For example:

“4.3.8 There is a lack of sufficient challenge among officers and from members. There is a considerable amount of trust in plans that are presented without evidence that those plans have been challenged. Some Portfolio holders readily accept the information they are given without systematic and robust challenge. There is a tendency for cabinet members to trust that the relevant individual portfolio holder has challenged proposals.

4.3.9 Decisions taken by the Cabinet need greater transparency. Council members and scrutiny chairs need access to more information. There was a desire expressed from some cabinet members for greater discussion and challenge across portfolios. However, where challenge has been provided, for example from the Audit Committee, that has not been welcomed.”

Northamptonshire CC – FINAL Feedback Report

Swire’s Conservative Middle East Council accused of bias towards Gulf Arab states

In a long article about the group, whose chairman Hugo Swire receives a salary of £2,000 per month, a number of allegations are made about CMEC, a couple of which mention Swire by name:

“CMEC’s rapprochement with the UAE extends beyond the Gulf to the country’s ambitions in north Africa. There it has become a key supporter of the Dubai’s controversial foreign policy towards Libya, backing Field Marshal Khalifa Haftar, a notorious warlord and one-time ally of Muammar Gaddafi, rather than the internationally recognised government in Tripoli.” …”

and

…”Some of CMEC’s donors also seem to have links to Libya’s former leaders.

Marwan Salloum is registered as a director of CC Property Company Ltd and is also owner of Consolidated Construction Company, the largest engineering firm in the Middle East which has interests in Libya.

Electoral Commission records show that CC Property Company Ltd made donations of £30,000 ($42,000) to CMEC in March 2017 and £17,000 ($24,400) in donations in 2011 and 2013.

Salloum is a former close friend and business associate of Saif al-Islam Gaddafi, son of the deposed leader. The pair reportedly enjoy each others company. During the revolution, photos emerged of Salloum partying with Saif on a luxury yacht in Brazil.

Crucially, Haftar is also supportive of Saif and once said of him: “If he wants to play a political role, there’s no problem,” also adding: “I have nothing against him, on the contrary, he is welcome.”

In June 2017, Saif was released from prison. He now lives under the protection of Haftar, despite being wanted for war crimes by the ICC.

The impact of the CMEC report on Libya is hard to gauge. Hundreds of such reports are published around Westminster each year. But such lobbying can have consequences.”

and

“The ties between Bahrain and CMEC go back further still. Each year, CMEC organises a delegation of MPs to attend the Manama Dialogue conferences, which take place under the auspices of the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS). At least 30 percent of the think tank’s budget comes from the Bahraini government, according to rights group Bahrain Watch.

The conference is an international forum for discussions of foreign affairs, but also acts as a soft power initiative for the Bahraini elite. According to Bahrain Watch, CMEC is “a central player in the visits” each year. Kwarteng is the only Conservative MP to have attended all Manama Dialogue conferences since 2011.

and

“Perhaps the most generous CMEC donor has been the property developer and financier David Rowland. A regular donor to the Conservative Party, he has given more than £465,000 ($660,000) towards CMEC’s running costs, including £60,000 ($85,000) in October 2017.

Rowland has close ties with the leaderships of both the UAE and Saudi Arabia and is presently in the process of creating a joint banking venture with the sovereign wealth fund of Abu Dhabi, Mubadala.

Rowland has also helped to secure multi-billion pound defence deals between British firms and the Saudi Arabian government. In 2011, Rowland offered his private jets to Prince Andrew for free, while the British royal visited Saudi Arabia to help secure deals for BAE Systems.”

and

“A second key donor with links to Saudi Arabia is Rosemary Said, wife of Wafic, a billionaire and key fixer in the al-Yamamah deal which delivered billions in British military equipment manufactured and maintained by BAE Systems to the Saudi armed forces from the mid-1980s onwards under the government of then-prime minister Margaret Thatcher.

Rosemary Said donated £50,000 ($71,150) to CMEC in September 2016, with further donations to CMEC of £20,000 ($28,460) in 2015 and £100,000 ($142,310) in 2008.

In June 2016, she also made a £10,000 ($14,230) donation to CMEC chairman Hugo Swire, which helped him get re-elected as an MP..”

and

“… the group was quiet on the most momentous decision to affect the Palestinian dispute of late – Donald Trump’s order on 6 December 2017 to move the US embassy in Israel to Jerusalem.

CMEC is yet to issue any formal statement, other than a tweet reporting the news on their Twitter feed.

A second tweet showed former chairman, Alan Duncan, now in his capacity as a government foreign office minister, giving a TV interview expressing the government’s disapproval. … But from the other CMEC officers there has been silence, including Docherty – now serving as vice chairman of CMEC.

There has also been silence from Kwarteng, despite publicising his CMEC report on the Libya migration crisis earlier in the year; and Hugo Swire, chairman of CMEC, who did not respond to the news on his otherwise active Twitter feed, even though he was attending a speech by Johnson, specifically about the Middle East, on the same day.”

and

“Swire told MEE it is wrong to think that CMEC has failed to stand up for Palestinians, pointing to the fact that the organisation’s affiliation to the Conservative Party made it subject to very strict funding rules.

He also said that CMEC had not acted as an advocate for British support for Haftar in Libya. “We don’t have a corporate view on these things. We do not lobby. We are merely a facilitator to encourage Tory MPs to get a better understanding of the Middle East as a whole.”

http://www.middleeasteye.net/fr/node/68869

Note: this entry was amended to Conservative Middle East COUNCIL.

How does a council become effectively bankrupt?

“… Earlier this month, Northamptonshire went effectively bankrupt, becoming the first local authority in two decades to issue a section 114 notice. This signalled that its finances were so precarious it would be unlikely to balance the books this year and was at risk of being unable to set a legal budget for 2018-19.

As a result, One Angel Square [its new HQ] is likely to be put up for sale, three months after it was formally opened by the communities secretary, Sajid Javid. A fire sale of assets is the only way to keep the council afloat, say officials, though even this temporary fix may not be enough to save it.

… The council’s predicament has triggered bitter recrimination among local Tories. Northamptonshire’s seven MPs, all Conservatives, accused the council of mismanagement. Heather Smith, the council leader, said the government had starved it of funds. Eighteen backbench Conservative councillors called on Smith to resign.

The irony is not lost on some observers that the first local authority to go bust under austerity is not the profligate Labour municipality of media caricature, but a Tory-run council in the heart of middle England.

Penny Smith, the council’s Unison branch secretary, said: “Can you just imagine if this was a Labour authority? They’d be saying ‘Typical Labour, can’t run anything’.”

Furthermore, it has crashed after rigid adherence to the Tory ideological rulebook for local government. Northamptonshire embarked on a “next generation” reform plan in 2014. Services would be outsourced or turned into profit-making companies. The council would drastically shrink in size and be run like a business. “The old model of local government no longer works,” it declared.

The grand plan failed at a cost, say critics, of more than £50m on consultants and rebranding. Expected efficiency savings did not materialise, some privatised services have since been hauled back in-house, and the scheme’s political architects, including the then council leader Jim Harker and the then chief executive Paul Blantern, have departed. After years of freezing council tax bills on principle, the authority has raised them by 6% from April.

… Northamptonshire’s future remains precarious. A government inspection into alleged financial and governance failures will report back in March. Staff morale is at rock bottom, said Smith. There is speculation that the county could be abolished and merged along with its five constituent district councils into two new unitary authorities.

There are fears that a handful of councils could follow Northamptonshire into bankruptcy. Conservative-run Surrey county council has a deficit of more than £100m. A survey by the Local Government Information Unit thinktank found eight out of 10 councils were concerned about their finances.

McLaughlin has warned Northamptonshire’s councillors that they should not assume the government will ride to the rescue. Ministers have promised a review of council funding, but this “is more likely to be concerned with the distribution of an ever-shrinking quantum of support than a major injection of spending power”.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/feb/11/northamptonshire-county-council-effective-bankruptcy-tories-cuts

“Fears of cover-up as government departments wipe staff mail boxes”

One imagines this is replicated at all levels …

“A Sunday Telegraph investigation found that the vast majority of departments are automatically deleting staff mail boxes within three months of their departure – prompting concern that the system is a recipe for cover-ups.

… A former government adviser on freedom of information said “It is hard to resist the thought that there is a happy coincidence between the approach to record management and getting rid of material that may contain unwanted answers about how particular decisions were reached – answers a department may prefer were unavailable if an FOI came in …”

Source: Sunday Telegraph

Privatised profit, public loss – a masterclass

Virgin – running vast parts of our NHS; Stagecoach – a virtual monopoly on bus services in East Devon and Greater Exeter.

“For the third time in a decade, an East coast rail franchise operator has shown little of the financial prudence once associated with the great cities linked by its trains from London to Yorkshire and Scotland. Following the failures of GNER in 2007 and National Express in 2009, Virgin Trains East Coast has run out of steam, with the government declaring a financial covenant breached and the contract set to fail in months.

The latest incumbent has, like its predecessors, bid too much to run a lucrative line whose potential revenues have fallen short, at a time when economic uncertainty has gnawed away at ticket sales.

But exactly why Stagecoach, the 90% lead partner to Virgin’s 10% stake in the current franchise, promised £3.3bn to run the line, and how that contract is now resolved, remain key questions – amplified by East Coast’s unique place in the blazing political row over how the UK rail network is run.

In 2013, when bidding started, East Coast was nationalised, run by Directly Operated Railways (DOR), a government-owned firm returning around £200m a year in premium payments to the Treasury.

The previous year, the parallel line north, the West Coast intercity service from London to Glasgow run by Virgin with Stagecoach since privatisation, had been the subject of a bidding competition gone bad. The award of the franchise to First Group was overturned on legal challenge after Virgin argued that its rivals had won with a colossal but unsustainable bid.

Pointing at the lessons of the past, failed East Coast franchises, the Virgin founder Sir Richard Branson railed: “Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results. When will the Department for Transport learn?”

Not soon enough. A government-commissioned inquest concluded that franchising remained the best model. A queue of rail contracts were almost up, not least the Virgin-run West Coast. But the reletting of East Coast to the private sector was prioritised ahead of a 2015 election that was expected to see a hung parliament, potentially keeping the line in public hands.

The dust had hardly settled when the DfT invited bids with a vision that would lead to Branson and Stagecoach promising undeliverable riches of their own.

Investment was coming to the East Coast line, including track and power upgrades, critically bringing a new fleet of InterCity Express IEP trains, with more than half of a £5.7bn government order earmarked for the line. What was promised, pledged or inferred – and how relevant it is to the collapse of VTEC’s contract – is contested.

Stagecoach claim upgrades were promised and not delivered that materially impacted its franchise; a review by Peter Hendy axed or deferred engineering works around the country after the infrastructure body Network Rail blew its budget on the electrification of the Great Western mainline.

However, Network Rail is clear it has already done the work necessary to bring in new trains and a timetable that would have turbocharged passenger numbers – and Stagecoach’s premium payments – after 2019. Chris Grayling, the transport secretary, has also said that no cancelled upgrades have affected the franchise to date.

What was wrong, it appears, was Branson’s conviction that a new livery and “people hungrily trying to make a real difference” could propel passenger numbers upwards from when Virgin took over. Instead, fares went up and the outlook went down.

They got their forecasts wrong, Stagecoach’s chief executive, Martin Griffiths, admitted this week. But, he added, the DfT “decided we offered a high quality and realistic bid … indeed, I was personally told at the time that it was the highest quality bid they had ever seen”.

In March 2016, a year after taking over, Branson and Stagecoach’s chair, Brian Souter, rode into King’s Cross on one of the first government-bought IEP trains, now in Virgin livery and rechristened Azumas by the private operators, a name with echoes of the Japanese rising sun. “Like a new day dawning on the railway,” said Souter.

But City analysts were flagging concerns. And by the time Grayling came to the Commons in November 2017 to announce a “rail strategy” that slipped in news that VTEC’s contract would be replaced in 2020 by an East Coast Partnership, investors had already factored in heavy losses.

Stagecoach’s share price bounced back on Grayling’s plan, widely described as a £2bn bailout – the value of the remaining payments to the government due from VTEC’s owners had the contract continued from 2020 until 2023. Condemnation was largely led by Lord Adonis, the former Labour transport secretary who nationalised the line when National Express failed to meet payments in 2009.

It is not clear why Grayling then waited until this week to announce the franchise’s imminent collapse – stoking fury by simultaneously confirming a direct award to extend Virgin’s West Coast deal, a contract now held, without competition, from 2012 to 2020.

Officially, Stagecoach had “breached a financial covenant”, although the company has not acknowledged this, and the financials have not altered significantly. The mooted East Coast Partnership was met with some bemusement – one well-placed rail industry figure said there was “no chance of it being up and running, and absolutely the last place you’d do something like that”. A Stagecoach statement spoke of “a hardening of the DfT’s negotiating position, coinciding with increased media and political scrutiny”.

Adonis himself sees it differently – that once the ink was dry on the West Coast extension, the rules had changed and Grayling had lost his bargaining chips. He said: “I’ve sat around a table from Brian Souter. He knows when he’s got his man. Stagecoach are playing Grayling.”

DfT officials are now assessing the relative cost of returning the East Coast franchise to public sector control or allowing VTEC to continue on a “not-for-profit” basis – which would nonetheless relieve them of paying hundreds of millions due to be paid to the government in the original deal. Other train companies will be watching intently as they too grapple with franchises whose ambitious promised payments to the government rely on passenger growth that has not materialised, or even gone into reverse.

Had Stagecoach continued to deliver its payments, which in the second and third year were roughly 30% higher than East Coast under its previous operator DOR, and improved the service, it would have been compelling vindication for those who urged its restoration to the private sector. Instead, Virgin joins the ranks of those who bet high on East Coast and saw it all go south.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/feb/10/east-coast-line-bailout-rail-privatisation-spotlight

Our local health services: our last line of defence

From the Save Our Hospital Services Facebook site:

:… these guys are our last line of defence. They need to work harder at not being manipulated.

Health and Adult Care Scrutiny Committee, County Hall, 25 January 2018

“I take my Scrutiny duty very seriously,” declared Cllr Brian Greenslade (Barnstaple North) at the Devon County Council Health and Adult Care Scrutiny Committee meeting at County Hall on 25 January. Save our Hospital Services (SOHS) members from North Devon who attended this and many other such meetings know this to be only too true.

Indeed, were it not for Cllr Greenslade and his meticulous colleague, Cllr Claire Wright (Otter Valley) it is doubtful how much scrutiny by the Scrutiny Committee there would be at all. One thing is certain: given the scale, speed and scope of the changes now being pushed through in health and social care services in Devon, real information, real questions and real answers have never been so vital. It is literally a matter of life and death.

At a previous Scrutiny meeting, the Chair, Cllr Sara Randall Johnson, in clear cahoots with Cllr Rufus Gilbert, manipulated proceedings. The two managed to prevent Cllr Wright putting a motion she had already tabled, thus shutting down a debate that may have saved in-patient services at some community hospitals.

This so outraged some councillors and members of the public that their chorus of complaints and the consequent internal investigation prompted the county’s lawyers to lecture councillors as to their legal obligations to scrutinise. The investigation and warning came too late for the community hospitals, but could better behaviour be expected from now on?

Indeed, it could. But then, on 25 January, the Chair of the Standards Committee was sitting in. This time Cllr Wright was allowed to say quite a lot, pose many more questions, and state much more of the obvious in defence of our health and social care services.

However, far too many of our County Councillors still appear unwilling to spend time and effort educating themselves as to the issues, facts and figures, whilst being only too willing to swallow propaganda and projections put out by overpaid health bosses bent on making severe cuts to our NHS services.

No one, even councillors who have barely raised a whisper in opposition, is in any doubt as to the real motive for all these health service changes: cuts and cutbacks designed to save £557 million over the next five years. The aim is to ration, restrict and remove elements of care and treatment for however many people it takes to save that amount of money. Cost comes first, clinical need a poor second.

Dr Sonja Manton was again allowed to speak at great length. She is NHS Devon’s lead cost-cutter, qualified by means of a doctorate in Systems Dynamics, not qualified in Medicine or any form of clinical care. Which sort of gives the game away –as does her most obvious skill, talking for a very long time without saying anything at all.

When questioned by Councillor Wright, she appeared, as ever, not to have the required data or evidence to hand. Cue the now customary promise to look it up and pass it on. The pattern that follows has been obvious for more than 15 months now. The Scrutiny Committee ends up waiting a long time for what they have asked for – if they get it at all — making real scrutiny in public for the public impossible. The lack of real information, the failure to meet requests, the failure to resolve contradictions in presentations cause real difficulties for our County Councillors meeting after meeting – not least again on 25 January.

It has been reported that Devon’s Clinical Commissioning Groups are bent on steamrollering ‘Accountable Care Organisations’ into position from 1 April. To prove that the joke is on us for what is, after all, April Fool’s Day, they have given the Scrutiny Committee no information about them at all. This is particularly scandalous and frightening. As Brian Greenslade stated: “I want to know where we are…..we need to understand where we’ve got to and what this may mean.”

One faint beacon of light is the announcement, on the same day as the Scrutiny meeting was held, that NHS England will hold 12 week consultations on the implementation of ACOs https://www.england.nhs.uk/…/consultation-aco-contracts/ which puts a very slight delay in place. But the website does not elaborate on how much time after closure of consultation implementation could happen. The Consultation could well be the outcome of an exchange between Sarah Wollaston, Chair of the Health Select Committee, and Jeremy Hunt, Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, as well as an attempt to water down the possible impact of a Judicial Review, which is being filed by a group of Health Care professionals, to challenge the government’s attempt to circumvent Parliament and democratic scrutiny and allow ACOs to operate

ACOs are financially constrained, business-based American-style systems of healthcare purchasing and provision, which will pave the way for further privatisation and still more rationing and restriction of provision. Councillor Martin Shaw from Seaton had done a lot of research on ACOs and put his findings online. But, incredibly, he had to force the whole issue onto the Committee’s Agenda just to secure the very limited discussion that took place.

Until this announcement it was the case that ACOs (unless the Judicial Review has effect) were to be imposed without any debate, discussion or statute. So an ACO could be and, in many cases, will be, a private business, primarily accountable to shareholders and managers rather than patients and the public. And even now we don’t know how ‘public’ the consultation will be. As Jan Goffey, Mayor of Okehampton, declared, “Sick people should never be regarded as a profit-making opportunity.”

Eventually even the Chair, Sara Randall Johnson said, “We need more information.” We have heard her, and others, say this before. Is this a way of avoiding doing anything? Or is it something more cynical: a way of helping to destroy our NHS, but giving themselves the excuse that they just did not know?

If so, it will only be because they failed to find out – or scrutinise.”

“Councils used as ‘human shields’ for cuts, says John McDonnell”

“John McDonnell has accused the government of using cash-strapped local councils as “human shields” to absorb deep spending cuts by the Treasury.

The shadow chancellor seized on reports that Surrey – where the Runneymede and Weybridge constituency of the chancellor, Philip Hammond, is located – was facing a £100m cash crisis.

Analysis by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism identified Surrey as the council facing the largest gap between expected revenues and expenditures in the coming financial year. The average deficit at the 150 councils the bureau examined was £14.7m.

Meanwhile, a survey of senior council officials by the Local Government Information Unit thinktank found that almost 80% had no confidence in the future sustainability of council finances.

McDonnell said: “If you ever wanted to see the utter failure of this government, look no further than your local council. Many are struggling to maintain many basic services because they are being forced to pass on Tory cuts.

“There needs to be an urgent change of direction in local government funding in this country. We need to see an end to a situation whereby Tory governments are using local councils like human shields as they continue to drive ahead with their failed austerity agenda.”

McDonnell appeared at a conference in Preston alongside the shadow communities secretary, Andrew Gwynne.

Many of the councils under greatest financial pressure are in Tory-held areas, and Conservative MPs have put pressure on the government to relieve the squeeze in particular areas.

Sajid Javid, the communities secretary, announced an extra £150m this week specifically to be spent on social care in areas of greatest need, amid a growing backlash from backbenchers.

But council leaders said it would not be enough to meet rapidly increasing needs.

The LGIU’s survey of councils’ finances suggested that 94% are planning to raise council tax in the coming year to make ends meet, and 65% will be dipping into their financial reserves.

In his speech, McDonnell highlighted alternative approaches to delivering local services.

Labour believes the threat to council services, such as social care and support for children, are the latest stark illustration of the ongoing impact of austerity.

The government has promised to put social care funding on a sustainable footing; but a green paper on the issue is not due to be published until next summer.”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/feb/08/john-mcdonnell-councils-used-human-shields-funding-cuts

Our independent councillors: constantly standing up for our local NHS

ITV West Country News, with interviews with:

Claire Wright – DCC Independent Councillor (Ottery St Mary)
Martin Shaw – DCC independent East Devon Alliance Councillor (Seaton and Colyton)
Cathy Gardner – EDDC East Devon Alliance Councillor (Sidmouth)

continually fighting for our local NHS:

Not a single EDDC or East Devon DCC councillor attended the protest, nor did either of our MPs.

“Decline of local journalism threatens democracy, says May”

In East Devon we had two local newspaper publishers: “View from … ” titles – a campaigning newspaper which recently closed and Archant (Midweek Herald and Journal titles) which basically mostly prints press releases from EDDC and elsewhere almost verbatim and pads them with anodyne articles, often linked to advertisers.

It is left now to bloggers such as Owl and campaigning Facebook groups (such as Save our Sidmouth and Save Exmouth Seafront) to use local sources to root out the stories Archant chooses not to print. Local campaigning newspaper journalism in East Devon is therefore pretty much on its last legs.

“The decline of local journalism is a threat to democracy and is fuelling the rise in fake news, Theresa May said while launching a review into whether state intervention was needed to preserve national and local newspapers.

The investigation is set to examine the rise of low-quality “clickbait” news and whether more could be done by either the industry or government to undermine commercial incentives to produce such content.

Speaking in Manchester to mark 100 years since the Representation of the People Act, which extended the vote to all men over 21 and some women over the age of 30, May said advances in modern technology were having “a profound impact on one of the cornerstones of our public debate – our free press”.

The review will examine the supply chain for digital advertisers and whether content creators, rather than platforms, are getting enough of the revenue. May said the review would examine “whether industry or government-led solutions” were needed to help tackle the issue.

The prime minister, wearing a purple jacket and suffragette pin, called journalism “a huge force for good” but said its existence was under threat. “Good quality journalism provides us with the information and analysis we need to inform our viewpoints and conduct a genuine discussion,” she said. “But in recent years, especially in local journalism, we have seen falling circulations, a hollowing-out of local newsrooms and fears for the future sustainability of high-quality journalism.”

How technology disrupted the truth | Katharine Viner
May said that more than 200 local papers had closed since 2005, naming several in Greater Manchester including the Salford Advertiser, Trafford Advertiser and Wilmslow Express. About two-thirds of local authority areas do not have a daily local newspaper.

“This is dangerous for our democracy. When trusted and credible news sources decline, we can become vulnerable to news which is untrustworthy,” she said. “So to address this challenge to our public debate we will launch a review to examine the sustainability of our national and local press. It will look at the different business models for high-quality journalism.”

May said the review would consider whether “the creators of content are getting their fair share of the advertisement revenue” from the articles they produced. “Digital advertising is now one of the essential sources of revenue for newspapers, the review will analyse how that supply chain operates,” she said. “A free press is one of the foundations on which our democracy is built and it must be preserved.”

The culture minister, Matt Hancock, said the review would investigate the overall health of the news media, the range of news available and how the press was adapting to the new digital market, including the role of platforms like Facebook and Google.

In a statement after May’s speech, Hancock said the industry was facing “an uncertain future” and the review would ensure the UK did not lose a vibrant, independent and plural free press. Hancock said it would examine “clickbait” news to consider if action needed to be taken to reduce its commercial incentive.

The review would also examine how data created or owned by news publications was collected and distributed by online platforms.

David Dinsmore, chair of the News Media Association, said he welcomed the plans: “This review acknowledges the importance of journalism in a democratic society, the vital role that the press takes in holding the powerful to account and producing verified news which informs the public. Viable business models must be found that ensure a wide variety of media are able to have a long and healthy future.”

A panel of experts will be appointed to lead the review in the coming months, with a final report expected early 2019.”

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2018/feb/06/decline-of-local-journalism-threatens-democracy-says-may