Sidford employment land victim of “electioneering”

District council chiefs who voted to remove Sidford’s controversial 12-acre employment site from a strategic plan were in fact powerless to enforce the decision, a campaigner has been told.

Councillor Marianne Rixson last week questioned why – after the decision was made unanimously in March 2015 – officers were never instructed to submit a ‘flood of new evidence’ to put it into action. Despite the last-ditch vote to have it removed, a Government planning inspector later ruled the allocation must remain in East Devon District Council’s (EDDC) Local Plan.

The answer to Cllr Rixson’s question, given at last Wednesday’s full EDDC meeting, confirmed the instruction was never given to remove the allocation from the plan – because a public inquiry was already under way.

Members heard that officer advice would have been to allow the planning inspector, who led the inquiry, to ‘reach his own conclusions’.

Last week’s meeting heard: “Members’ resolution to remove the allocation from the plan was, and could only ever have been, a suggestion to the inspector as, following its submission for examination, the council no longer had the power to make changes to it.

“There was, therefore, no opportunity to submit evidence to support this change, however, even if there had been, the evidence produced up to that point had supported its allocation and it is likely that any future evidence would have reached the same conclusion.”

Cllr Rixson, a long-time campaigner against the allocation who was elected last May, said the Conservative-majority council only took the vote because it felt threatened by her and her East Devon Alliance colleagues.

She said: “The final comment [above] confirms our suspicions that EDDC never changed its mind about the Sidford site being in the Local Plan.

“Voting to ‘remove it’ was purely an electioneering stunt just before the district council elections in 2015.”

An application to develop the employment site into a 9.3-acre business park was refused in September, although EDDC bosses said they remain committed to its development.

Cllr Rixson added: “The recent refusal of the application to develop the site exposed significant planning policies that should have been considered when the Local Plan was being drawn up.

“The outstanding question is why they did not come to the fore when they could have made an impact on the Local Plan?”

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/vote_to_remove_sidford_employment_site_electioneering_1_4761216

“Ministers on course to miss target of selling enough public land for 160,000 new homes by 2020”

“The Public Accounts Committee said the Government will have to order a “significant acceleration in the last years of the programme” to sell land for the remaining 149,000 homes still to be built, over the next three and a half years.

Officials in charge of the policy at the Department for Communities and Local Government had “taken their eye off the ball” before the last election, they said.

The MPs said the Government’s plans to build 160,000 new homes between 2015 and 2020 were “back-loaded, which increases the risk that government will not meet its commitment”.

The Government told the MPs that only enough land for 8,380 new homes – five per cent of the total – had been sold.

They said the “slow start to the new programme” was either because they “took their eye off the ball at the end of the previous programme that ran up to 2015 or are struggling to find suitable sites”.

Meg Hillier MP, chairman of the Public Accounts Committee, said: “There is a desperate need for new homes and public land is an irreplaceable asset.

“Taxpayers clearly have a right to know whether they are getting a good deal from its sale and how many homes are being built as a result.

“Sluggish sales have hindered progress towards the 2020 target while questions continue to hang over the potential of many sites earmarked for sale and whether homes will be in the places people want to live.

“Ultimately the public will judge the success of this programme on the basis of the homes built and the Government must make clear who taxpayers should hold to account for this.”

Earlier this year the Government was criticised after it emerged that officials were not required to keep track of whether new homes were actually being built on public land sold for housing.

It then emerged in January this year that only 1,800 new homes had built on public land out of the 109,000 promised by former Prime Minister David Cameron in 2011.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/11/02/ministers-on-course-to-miss-target-of-selling-enough-public-land/

Exmouth overspend and its worrying ramifications

See agenda item 16 – pages 81 – 91 of papers for next Cabinet meeting on 9 November:

Of particular note:

· The budget estimate rising from £1.5m to £3.12m

· As per 2.1 and 2.2 – a planning application for phases 2 and 3 is being submitted, as a ‘technical exercise’ to sustain the planning application (as the outline would be due to expire). [Is this allowed?]

· As quoted on page 84 ‘The planning authority will seek responses from the public to the planning application but the Council itself is not proposing to go beyond this with additional consultation for this technical exercise’.

· Consultation is then mentioned as coming after the technical exercise, in language used to imply consultation will be thorough (despite missing the important issue of consultation needing to happen before decisions are made!).

· Having told the tenants of the Harbour View (in a public meeting) that the Harbour View will be considered a separate application, and framing it to sound altruistic and caring of them, they now state that the Regeneration board has considered marketing the Harbour View site BEFORE the rest of the site in recognition of its value!”

… Loads more in there, makes awful reading.

Click to access 091116combinedcabagenda-sm.pdf

Quiz Hernandez at EDDC scrutiny meeting this Thursday 3 November 6.00 pm

“Police and Crime Commissioner (pages 12 – 13)
The PCC, Alison Hernandez, will give a brief outline of her work since her election and respond to the questions submitted in advance (contained in the agenda papers) as well as answer questions put at the meeting.”

Click to access 031116-scrutiny-agenda-combined.pdf

Hernandez statement on that selfie visit to Exeter fire

“I went to Cathedral Green to offer my support, and to thank the police, firefighters and other emergency services. They did a fantastic job in extremely difficult circumstances throughout the day.”

http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/police-and-crime-commissioner-snapped-taking-selfie-by/story-29850086-detail/story.html

The bit she missed out: “Oh, and to get a selfie with the Fire Chief to show what a media star I am”.

Next – a fashion shoot in Hello magazine, perhaps?

One of her election “promises” was:

Co-Founder of Torbay Social Media Café – free events helping support organisations to better use social media. I will develop Cyber Crime Cafés to keep people safe online.”

Alison Hernandez

They say voters get what they deserve. Just about 22% of the electorate voted – THEY may have got what they voted for – the rest – well, you see now what a vote for someone else might have avoided.

Politics Iceland style – Pirate Party poised for victory

“A party that favours direct democracy, complete government transparency, decriminalising drugs and offering asylum to Edward Snowden could form the next government in Iceland after the country goes to the polls on Saturday.

Riding a wave of public anger at perceived political corruption in the wake of the 2008 financial crash and the Panama Papers scandal in April, Iceland’s Pirate party looks on course to either win or finish a close second.

The radical party, founded by activists and hackers four years ago as part of an international anti-copyright movement, captured 5% of the vote in 2013 elections, winning three seats in Iceland’s 63-member parliament, the Althingi.

This time around, analysts say it could win between 18 and 20 seats. This would put it in pole position to form a government at the head of a broad progressive alliance of up to five parties currently in opposition.

The party’s leader and figurehead is Birgitta Jónsdóttir, a 49-year-old feminist MP, poet, artist and former WikiLeaks collaborator. Jónsdóttir says she has no ambition to be prime minister, pointing to the Pirate party’s horizontal structure. Rather, she wants to sweep away what she sees as Iceland’s dysfunctional system.

“People in Iceland are sick of corruption and nepotism,” she has said. She likens Iceland to a chilly North Atlantic version of Sicily, ruled by a few “mafia-style families” plus their friends, whom she nicknames “the Octopus”.

Of her political movement, she says: “We do not define ourselves as left or right but rather as a party that focuses on the systems. In other words, we consider ourselves hackers – so to speak – of our current outdated systems of government.”

This anti-establishment message has resonated with large swaths of Iceland’s 320,000-strong population, especially the young. On Monday Jónsdóttir and two party colleagues took part in an AMA, or “ask me anything”, on Reddit. Their wide-ranging discussion covered the EU (the Pirates would put Iceland’s membership application to a referendum), fishing quotas, whaling, climate change and the party’s name.

“We’re called the Pirate party in reference to a global movement of Pirate parties that popped up over the last decade,” parliamentary candidate Smári McCarthy explained. “Despite our name, we’re taken fairly seriously in Iceland, in particular because of our very aggressive anti-corruption stance, [and] our pro-transparency work.” …

… All too often in Icelandic politics, the party says, electoral pledges are reneged on after elections, with “the parties forming a government … hiding behind compromises in coalition – enabling them to cheat voters again and again”.

Saturday’s election was prompted by the resignation of Iceland’s prime minister Sigmundur Davið Gunnlaugsson. He became the first major casualty of the Panama Papers in April after the leaked legal documents revealed he and his wife had millions of pounds of family money offshore. Gunnlaugsson hadn’t declared the British Virgin Islands company.

This was not illegal, but the news sparked outrage and some of the largest protests that Iceland has ever seen. The ruling coalition replaced Gunnlaugsson with the agriculture and fisheries minister Sigurður Ingi Jóhannsson and promised elections before the end of this year.

Gunnlaugsson’s Progressive party is now languishing at about 8% in the polls, barely a third of its score in the 2013 elections. Support for the Independence party, the Pirates’ rival for the position of largest party, seems to be holding. …

… Built on the belief that new technologies can help promote civic engagement and government transparency and accountability, the Pirates also advocate an “unlimited right” for citizens to be involved in political decision-making. It wants voters to be able to propose new legislation and decide on it in national referendums.

The Pirate party is part of a global anti-establishment trend typified by parties on the left such as Syriza in Greece and Podemos in Spain, and on the right such as Germany’s AfD and Britain’s Ukip. As well as promising to accept Bitcoin as legal tender, Iceland’s Pirates have pledged to maintain the country’s economic stability. …

… Unlike some other anti-establishment parties, the Pirates have made clear they have no intention of doing anything likely to upset the economy. Analysts say there is little panic at the prospect of the radical party entering government.

“Across Europe, increasingly many people think that the system that is supposed to look after them is not doing it any more,” Jónsdóttir said. “But we know we are new to this, and it is important that we are extra careful and extra critical of ourselves to not take too much on.”

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/26/iceland-election-could-propel-radical-pirate-party-into-power

Two mid-Devon Conservative councillors removed from committees following investigation

News announced in a press release, presumably from the council, that very carefully excludes the reasons why they were removed:

http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/two-mid-devon-conservative-councillors-removed-from-committees-following-investigation/story-29809275-detail/story.html

Take control …

“Take control” are two of the most potent words in our language that have come to mean just one thing in the weeks since the Brexit vote.

But the desire for more control over our lives is not the exclusive preserve of Leave voters – and nor can it or should it be confined to the issue of immigration.

Our polling shows that people from all backgrounds and with every kind of belief now feel they have lost control over what matters most to them, whether it is the price of a home, the pace of technological change or the poisoning of our planet.

Far from being supporters of the status quo, a clear majority of remain supporters specifically identify big business and corporate elites as having “too much power over their lives”.

By an even bigger margin of 62%, those who voted remain in the referendum say that only a few people in power take all the big decisions, adding that there is not much the average citizen can do about it.

Those decisions now seem further out of reach than ever for millions of people after the party conference season. The government has confirmed its determination to pursue a hard Brexit, even though that risks making matters worse for people who already feel left behind in this economy.

At the same time, many people see opposition parties as being in disarray and deeply divided, leaving some to despair at the prospects for progressive politics ever providing answers, let alone getting the chance to put them into practice.

A storm in our economy and our democracy that has been gathering for decades is now firmly upon us. A torrent of wealth of power is washing away even the fragile footholds people had established in the economy. Many more now face losing control all together in the face of global, technological and climate change.

Yet, even in the midst of all this upheaval, a surge of energy is being generated that can crack open new possibilities for people to take more control right now – not at some distant point in the future.

The New Economics Foundation seeks to give people the tools to take control and change their lives for the better
Today, the New Economics Foundation is setting out ways to shift debate beyond secret negotiations over Brexit in the capitals of Europe, seemingly endless party infighting in Westminster’s opposition, or literal fights in Brussels over whose turn it is next to lead Ukip.

Instead, we are setting out an agenda for people to take control themselves, without having to wait for government to do it for – or to – them.

Our agenda for people draws on real experiences, ranging from those in seaside communities who feel abandoned by the political elite, taxi drivers in London trying to make a living in an Uber-ised economy, small businesses starved of finance, consumers overcharged for energy, and young families hoping for their first home or worried about the cost of childcare.

It seeks to give all of them the tools they need to take control and change their lives for the better. Coastal communities will find ways to revive a clean marine economy which brings together people who care about the environment with those who care about getting decent jobs. We are helping to develop a new taxi app owned and controlled by drivers themselves, from London to Leeds, to give them the chance to share in the vast new digital value being created around us.

The foundation is also drawing up plans to turn the scandal-torn RBS into 130 stakeholder banks that serve local firms rather than expecting them to serve it. We have teamed up with the Switched On London campaign to help communities generate renewable and affordable energy that gives them a real stake in a low-carbon future.

Furthermore, in a project with Citizens UK, we are creating the first maps of vacant public land available for the houses that need to get built. And we are helping parents expand the number of childcare co-operatives so they can not only afford a service fundamental to modern working lives, but also exercise more control over it.

This is not an agenda merely for clicktivists who think change happens on a smartphone screen on the way to a rally. We recognise that the tools people need to take control must be fashioned in partnership with institutions wielding real power, ranging from devolved government, city mayors and forward-looking businesses to trade union and community-led campaigns across the country.

But this is the first time a major thinktank has set itself a bigger ambition than merely influencing ministers or future legislation, or getting included in a political party’s manifesto.

The New Economics Foundation will focus on helping people and communities take control by engaging with new partners – from the Mayor of London and Google DeepMind to the GMB and Citizens UK – to explore new possibilities for change right now.

We are rooted outside the traditional boundaries of politics. We care most about people’s everyday experience. And we will work with communities of all kinds to give them the tools they need to build a better future because there has never been a more urgent need for a new economy than right now.”

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2016/oct/11/politicians-housing-employment-childcare-control-new-economics-foundation

“Information not held”

Freedom of Information requests to East Devon District Council on the whatdotheyknow website:

“EDDC policy and guidance on conducting public consultations
Response by East Devon District Council to tim todd on 23 March 2016.
Information not held.

Request for information that supports ‘success’ claims made by Cllr Moulding (Premier Inn)
Response by East Devon District Council to tim todd on 29 April 2016.
Information not held.

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/body/east_devon_district_council

Transcript of Councillor Andrew Moulding’s attempt to explain development on Exmouth Seafront to Simon Bates on BBC radio

Owl’s summary of Moulding’s attempt to explain EDDC’s current “thinking”:

We have been planning Exmouth Sea Front for 6 years and we know exactly what we are doing, even though our preferred bidder Moirai has only got initial ideas and we haven’t yet decided what Phase 3 will consist of or how much it will all cost. And it’s going to be completely built up yet very open – and sand drifts are exactly what everyone wants.”

The interview transcript:

“Simon Bates: In Exmouth a group of badgers are thought to be living near a former crazy golf course on the sea front, and they’re involved in a completely different type of dispute. At stake is the proposed multi-million pound development of the area, seen as crucial for Exmouth by East Devon District Council, but viewed by some locals as a terrible mistake for the town.

In the maelstrom, in the middle of it, trying to keep the peace is Adrian Campbell. Good morning Adrian. … What’s going on?

Adrian Campbell: Well, badgers and crazy golf – it does sound a bit peculiar I agree. On Queen’s Drive on the sea front in Exmouth the district council has plans for a quite a big development there. It’s close to the former crazy golf area. There’s also an amusement arcade nearby, and an old railway carriage cafe used to be there.

Now some of these have already gone, they’ve been fenced off, big changes are planned for an idea originally called Exmouth Splash. There’s been consultation about that before. They want to develop this area. Its close to another development that has already taken place known as Ocean, which is a big bowling area that has been built on the sea front just down from the Premier Inn.

However, on this site are badgers, and local people say that they believe that they were under the crazy golf course. That seems to have been confirmed – not so many of them, as there is a bigger sett further off the site.

We spoke to Louise McAllister from Save Exmouth Seafront…

Louise MacAllister: It was alerted to me by a local resident that there were badgers living in this site up until very recently. So I was a little bit concerned that they had already gone ahead with the demolition, because you have to apply for a license to interfere with a sett, and I am just a little bit worried that East Devon District Council have not had the time to do that.

Simon Bates: Can we talk about East Devon District Council because this sounds like a labyrinthine one, let alone about the sett. What did they tell you?

Adrian Campbell: Well they have confirmed that they have, first of all, found out using an expert, Dr. Julian Brown, that there are two small setts, part of a more significant complex badger sett off the site. However, this is important, they say that they have been working with Natural England and they’ve been given a license to relocated them to a larger sett. And they say, basically, that the work that has been done so far won’t have caused any problem and is perfectly OK. So that is what they are saying, but you have this larger issue, much larger issue, about what’s going to happen in the area and lots of controversy about that.

Simon Bates: Yes. That is a story I hadn’t thought of. Because where do you put badgers, because they don’t automatically go into other badger setts because that is a confrontation situation.

Adrian Campbell: Well they wouldn’t go far apparently. They would go just to the bigger sett nearby, but off the site. That’s what they said.

Simon Bates: But would that be OK with those badgers that already occupy the bigger sett.

Adrian Campbell: I don’t know. I’m not a badger expert.

Simon Bates: No, neither am I. But you know what dogs are like, and basically that’s what we are talking about.

Adrian Campbell: I was just going to say, presumably under the advice of Natural England, it should be OK. But then you’ve got this larger issue about this whole area and the big changes that are being proposed. And, some people have asked about modernising this area.

Effectively, there is a boating lake there with swans on it. It’s a very traditional seaside kind of scene at the moment, or it has been, and what is talked about here is a really big change. Now some people are quite keen on that – other people are slightly concerned about it. We spoke to one gentleman, Robin Rule, and is what he was saying.

Robin Rule: Our main priorities now are to try to preserve the boating lake and the fun park. Because the boating lake and the fun park is in fact the face, the face, of Exmouth Seafront. Millions of people love it, whether you live here, whether you are visiting it from holiday or around. That’s what we want to try to hold onto.

Simon Bates: Its the traditional against the future, isn’t it. The swans on the boating lake – I suppose you can call iconic. And then there are the other attractions that have been there for donkeys years vs. the new face of the seafront, the bowling centre you talked about, the Exmouth Ocean. Which vision do you think will win out?

Adrian Campbell: Well when you look at the plans, and I am looking at a plan that goes back to 2013, a big graphic showing what is proposed. Now the council has told me that it has changed quite a lot, but it’s a really large site. Some have told me locally it would be similar in size to the town centre of Exmouth, but right on the seafront. Now some people are a bit concerned about that, and you will hear from the council in a minute. We spoke to an independent councillor, Megan Armstrong, she’s quite worked up about it.

Cllr Megan Armstrong: What concerns people is that as soon as one building goes up it’s setting the scene for a whole more other buildings going up. And people just don’t want that. They like the openness, they like the facilities that are here because children love them, families love them, and they’re reasonably priced because a lot of people who come here don’t have a lot of money, and they’re families with children, at that’s why we get a lot of people coming here.

Simon Bates: Well, there’s the independent councillor Megan Armstrong. We’ve got, as you’ve hinted there Adrian, Cllr Andrew Moulding.

Good morning Cllr Moulding. Deputy Leader of East Devon District Council.

Adrian Campbell: Cllr, Good Morning. You’ve heard the reaction of some of the people there that we have spoken to. First of all, with the badgers, has the council got it right?

Cllr Andrew Moulding: Well, I heard your report, Adrian, on the situation with the badgers which is exactly as you stated. The council has a license from Natural England and during this sensitive process that is what we have to have. We have, and again you are quite right, we have a badger expert. He’s a leading consultant on badgers in the country, and that is Dr. Julian Brown. He’s identified that these two small setts are part of a more significant complex badger sett which is off the site, and in consultation with Dr Brown, the badgers who are living in these two small badger setts can quite amicably be relocated to the larger sett. And that’s what under the advice of Dr Brown and with the license from Natural England, that is what the council are carrying out.

Adrian Campbell: But what about the scale of this? Because people are saying in the area, people that we spoke to yesterday, and admittedly though a self-selecting group who turned up, but they are talking about the scale of this. I mean, how many millions is this going to cost, and how big is phase one, two and three?

Cllr Andrew Moulding: We don’t know the overall cost of this yet. What we do know is that we have put the project into three phases. The first phase is to relocate the road and the car park, so that the car park is further to the rear of the site and not inhibiting the views across the estuary. Similarly with the road. That will allow access to visitors and residents to the sea front. That will be stage one.

Stage two will be a very exciting water sports centre, built on the …

Adrian Campbell: It’s big isn’t it? It’s going to be very big?

Cllr Andrew Moulding: Oh yes, it’s pretty big, yes. It will, but it will encompass a water sports centre for people who are doing kite-surfing and so on, but also there will be an open-air performance space there, a number of small units that trade in water sports. So the attraction of water sports to Exmouth has always been well known. We already have national competitions at Exmouth and we obviously feel that this is something that will be well appreciated by visitors and locals alike.

Adrian Campbell: But just briefly, do you understand the concerns of local people who are saying that the scale of this dwarfs what has been there in the past traditionally. You’ve got the bowling centre down the road – they say that the council’s taken that on because it wasn’t making enough money, I don’t know whether that’s right or not. But they question whether or not there is the demand for all of this. And they also say this is a special area.

Cllr Andrew Moulding: Yes. There would almost be an anchor at each end. So you’ve got Ocean at one end, you’ll have the water sports centre at the other end, inbetween phase three is the development of what was the old fun park – or still is because we are allowing the tenant of the fun park to trade for another season while the details of that part of the site are being developed – so he will carry on and trade there until such time as we need the site to be vacated so that the phase three work can go ahead. That’s still to be determined …

Simon Bates: Actually, can I just jump in there Councillor Moulding because Adrian can’t ask you this, he’s is far too nice a man. It all sounds a bit woolly.

Cllr Andrew Moulding: No not woolly at all. I mean its a plan that’s been in the offing for about the last six years. Now at last it is coming to fruition. And obviously there are stages one needs to go through to arrange the necessary planning details, and so on. That is going through process at the moment. The first phase, as I say, is to relocate the road, move the car park, and then to get the water sports centre built, and then we can look in more detail at phase three which is the remainder of the site. We very much hope that the majority of the area will be open and free to people to use.

Simon Bates: It’s a very exposed site as well, isn’t it Councillor? You’ve got high seas and sand blowing in during the winter.

Cllr Andrew Moulding: That’s the beauty of the site. I mean, that’s what everybody likes about it. That it is …

Simon Bates: Yes, but your going to build up the whole place aren’t you?

Cllr Andrew Moulding: The water sports centre will have open spaces within it. But its a development which has been well planned, we are working with the …

Adrian Campbell: But you haven’t got drawings or architect’s plans yet, have you? And you haven;t got a developer as I understand, so people are saying that the area’s closed off, and they can’t get to it and use it.

Cllr Andrew Moulding: Well, we have the water sports centre, [sniggering heard in background] and we have a preferred developer in place, Moirai, who have come up with some initial proposals. We are looking closely at those to see if it is exactly what is required, we shall look carefully at that as phase three while the tenant is still on site so that the people of Exmouth can enjoy facilities on the site until we are ready to go forward with the next stage.

Simon Bates: Councillor, thank you very much indeed. Adrian, I think that’s all we are going to get, don’t you?

Adrian Campbell: I know. Thank you, Simon.

[Sounds of laughter from Simon Bates]
Simon Bates: Stay across it. Beaver or should I say badger away. Adrian Campbell, thank you very much indeed.”

http://www.eastdevonalliance.org.uk/megan-armstrong/20161007/simon-bates-cllrs-armstrong-moulding-interviewed-exmouth-seafront/

When is a hospital not a hospital?

Can we nail the belief, shared by MP Hugo Swire, that “no hospitals are going to close” in the Lack-of-Success Regime’s plans for East Devon.

When you take away ALL the hospital beds from a hospital you are left with a so-called “health hub” which takes out-patient appointments and, if you are lucky, some minor procedures. It is NOT a hospital.

If, during one of those minor procedures, you suffer a serious problem and need to be an in-patient or need to receive emergency care, you will be transferred to a REAL hospital – if you can find one.

Maybe the next step is to designate residential homes as “low impact hospitals” and nursing homes as “satellite hospitals”. After all, polytechnics became universities overnight, so anything is possible.

LEP creates its own “Business Forum” – but it’s independent, honest guv!

Owl’s view: Unfortunately, it still walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and is still one hundred percent an LEP duck! Oh, and who is on it’s board – LEP Board member Tim Jones – quack, quack!

“A new business group has been formed to advise Government decision makers – but stressed it is not in competition with other South West business organisations.

B4SW will provide information and reports to the South West Local Enterprise Partnership (HotSW LEP) and ensure businesses across the region have a strong voice in discussions over Government investment.

“We have no intention of competing with other business groups,” Mr Marrow said. “They are doing good stuff.”

He explained that B4SW may be new, but is actually a “restructuring” of the Heart of the South West Local Enterprise Partnership’s (HotSW LEP) business forum.

That body was set up by the LEP, but was nevertheless independent of it, in order to provide business engagement.

But the forum was often mistaken as being part of the LEP, Chris Marrow, B4SW chairman, explained.

So, he said, B4SW has been formed as a community interest company (CIC), a type of social enterprise, to provide “a better structure to that of the forum, which had been “an informal group”.

Mr Marrow said the new organisation would report to the LEP, the organisation created by the coalition Government in 2011 to determine investment priorities, but is not constrained by the HotSW area of Devon and parts of Somerset.

“We meet around the region and will cover Cornwall,” Mr Marrow said, at an early meeting held in Plymouth.

“It’s a forum in which business people can come together and explore ideas and put their expertise back into the community for the advantage of the region.”

Mr Marrow said B4SW is composed of business people with vast experience in sectors such as maritime, supply chain, education, rural development and overseas trade.

“We have business people with particular expertise, a lot of experience in international affairs, with overseas contacts, and work with people in Africa and China,” he said.

He said the executive board has links to various other organisations such as universities and colleges, Chambers of Commerce, and the Federation of Small Businesses.

“The objective is to help businesses develop in the South West,” he said. “That includes improving exports, productivity, and job creation.”

He said B4SW would provide “blue sky thinking” and supply reports to the LEP.

He gave examples of studies into biofuels, ballast water management and kelp (seaweed) farming.

B4SW has also arranged a visit from transport training experts in South Africa and had discussions with Plymouth University and Flybe about maritime and aviation training.

Tim Jones, a B4SW board member, said the aim is also to bring together all business organisations across the HotSW and Cornwall and Isles of Scilly LEPs.

He said it was vital businesses shared a unified voice in order to push for Government investment, especially as political devolution is on the agenda.

“A combined business voice is essential, and becoming more so as we move down the devolution agenda and anther round of Government austerity,” he said. “So the cooperation of the business community is crucial.

“With devolution, although there is talk about business engagement, there’s a fear the voice of business will diminish.

“Combine that with the problems Whitehall has about infrastructure investment in the South West, it’s vital we have a single voice coming from the business community.”

http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/new-business-group-set-up-to-push-for-government-investment-in-south-west/story-29775868-detail/story.html

Sovereignty or dictatorship?

David Cameron did not discuss EU referendum with his Cabinet before he called it, claims Ken Clarke:

“David Cameron never discussed his decision to call a referendum on Britain’s membership in the European Union with his Cabinet, former Tory Cabinet minister Ken Clarke has claimed.

The 76-year-old Tory veteran criticised how Mr Cameron ran his Cabinet meetings, which he said met for 90 minutes one morning each week.

In his book, which is being serialised by The Sunday Times, Mr Clarke wrote: “This was an almost comically inadequate time within which to discuss any important subject.”

In particular, he said Mr Cameron failed to adequately discuss “his startling and catastrophic decision to call a referendum on Britain’s membership of the EU in cabinet”.

“… In my opinion, this is a disastrous way to run the government of a complex modern nation state,” he said. “It is a reaction to the hysterical constant 24/7 chatter that now dominates political debate.

“Media handling and public relations are now regarded as the key elements of governing, and a small army of advisers who are supposed to be PR experts but who are of frankly variable quality have far too big a role in policy-making.

“Next week’s headlines are given more priority than serious policy development and the long-term consequences for the nation.”

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-cameron-eu-referendum-brexit-ken-clarke-memoirs-pm-did-not-discuss-with-cabinet-a7342856.html

Yet another example of EDDC’s similarity to national government – secrecy and spin much more important than transparency and proper discussion.

Devolution “myths” not myths at all, says Devon County Councillor

From the Facebook page of Lib Dem Councillor for Totnes, Robert Vint:

“On Monday Devon County Councillors were presented with a “Myth Busting” training session on Devolution. On Thursday there was a repeat session for South Hams District Councillors.

The “Myths” they were attempting to “bust” were that the Devolution process was led by the LEP, was undemocratic, would result in local government reorganisation / centralisation etc.

The explanations – or non-explanations – only strengthened my concerns. It was confirmed that there would be no public consultation on the economic development plan but only on the Combined Authority proposal and that the LEP had played a central role.

I asked why the plan did not start by identifying local needs such as rural unemployment and affordable housing then consult communities and small businesses on how to tackle these problems. They said not to worry as this was an outline economic plan – but later they confirmed that there would be no consultation on the economic plan or any opportunity to change it.

We have a Devolution Prospectus written by the few big businesses in the LEP to serve their own needs rather than those of the wider community of Devon and Somerset. This has then been rubberstamped by local authorities who did not have the staff, time or vision to rewrite it to meet our real needs and who failed to consult residents and small and family businesses. As a result we will be subjected, without any opportunity to comment, to a local economic development strategy that will serve the wealthy rather than the majority and that will fail to provide jobs where they’re needed or houses to the people who need them most.

In contrast the RSA – Royal Society of Arts – outlines how we should be delivering genuine, fair and inclusive devolution (see below).

The UK’s economic status-quo has resulted in huge sections of our population being ‘left behind’. So the RSA are proposing a radical programme of devolution, inclusive industrial strategies and investment in human capital to create a more inclusive, equal society.

https://www.thersa.org/discover/publications-and-articles/rsa-blogs/2016/09/inclusive-growth-proposals

“Bonanza of Brexit Lobbying” including £3,000 to be in Theresa May’s company

“The Conservatives are selling access to Theresa May and other ministers for more than £3,000 a head to corporate executives and lobbyists at their party conference this autumn.

The executives will pay for the chance to attend a lunch session with the prime minister and a dinner with the chancellor, as well as more intimate “round table” sessions with ministers relevant to their industry.

The practice of charging corporate executives for access to ministers emerged under David Cameron, with the “business day” originally priced at around £1,000 a head for a session with the former prime minister and chancellor.

A new corporate brochure for the Tory party conference shows the price for attending the business day and dinner has now surged to £3,150 per person for the chance to be in the presence of May and her new government ministers.

The prime minister is listed as giving a question and answer session over lunch, with pictures of past events showing ministers mingling on tables with businesspeople.

In separate sessions, three Treasury ministers will host a talk billed as “Treasury insights” and business ministers will host a “partnering with business” session.

The website advertising the event features a picture of May, along with the claim that business day “offers representatives from the business community the opportunity to engage in discussion with senior Conservative politicians”.

May’s decision to participate in the event hints that she is not intending to break from Cameron’s previous approach to lobbying, despite her claims to want to run a country for the many not the few and tackle “vested interests” in the corporate world.

Tamasin Cave of the Alliance for Lobbying Transparency and Spinwatch, said it was “very concerning and worrying” that May was planning to “continue with politics as normal under David Cameron”.

She said there is a “bonanza of Brexit lobbying” coming down the tracks for May to deal with at a time when the public has little faith that politicians will stand up to powerful corporate interests.

“People do not trust establishment politicians on this issue of lobbying. She has a big problem on her hands, which she does not seem to understand,” Cave said.

Asked about the event selling access to May and other ministers, a Conservative spokesman said: “This is an important opportunity to engage directly with businesses and to highlight how, as part of our plan to create an economy that works for everyone, we will continue to back business and enterprise.”

Labour also has a “business forum” founded at around the same time, charging around £899 for a ticket and giving access to unspecified “politicians and leading businesspeople”.

The Lib Dem corporate event has gone down in price since the party declined in influence and left government, with a ticket costing just £240 to attend compared with £800 for their business day and £350 for their business dinner in 2014.

May will face calls to clamp down on lobbying next week, when Lord Brooke, a Labour peer, tables a private member’s bill arguing for the replacement of the current ineffective lobbying register with a genuine register that records who people are lobbying, their client, the type of influence they are seeking and how much they are spending.

Unlock Democracy, a campaign group, said the bill would bring the UK into line with other institutions such as the US, EU and Scotland.

“It’s time for Theresa May to put clear blue water between her and Cameron. She can set the tone for her premiership by backing real lobbying transparency,” it said.”

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/sep/01/lunch-with-theresa-may-thatll-will-be-3150

When it pays ( handsomely) to be sacked

George Osborne looks set to make hundreds of thousands of pounds a year on the after-dinner speaking circuit after he joined one of Washington DC’s most exclusive agencies.

The former chancellor has been given the green light by the civil service to join Washington Speakers Bureau after being sacked from the government by Theresa May.

While fees for the speakers are not made public, US reports have suggested “big names” can get $50,000 a speech while “top attractions” can get up to $300,000.

He joins a stellar class of politicians at the firm including former prime ministers Gordon Brown and Tony Blair and former US president George W Bush. …
…The Tory MP for Tatton’s new role was formally approved on Tuesday by the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments, which signs off jobs for former ministers to ensure there is no conflict of interest. …

He has promised to “personally approve any engagement to ensure that there is no conflict of interest” and must wait until three months after his sacking to take up the post.

Mr Osborne was also told by the committee that he “should not become personally involved in lobbying the UK Government on behalf of the Washington Speakers Bureau or its clients” for at least two years. …”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/08/16/george-osborne-expected-to-make-hundreds-of-thousands-after-join/

So, George, are you quite sure you know what lobbying means?

Exmouth regeneration: Spin, Skinner, Spin!

Q: When is an answer not an answer? A: when it is an EDDC senior councillor’s answer!

Transcribed from Exmouth Journal:

Q – We mentioned the visitor’s survey. If the outcome of the survey is that overwhelmingly visitors like the seafront the way it is and don’t want much to change, will that be the way the council then proceeds?

A – “The visitors’ survey doesn’t involve local people, it’s for visitors only. It will give us an indication of what visitors perceive is a visitor wish list when they go on holiday, what they like to see.

The interesting thing is this survey is being conducted by the South West Research Company, and we looked for a company from the South West because, when we talk about benchmarking Exmouth Against other seaside towns, it’s no good trying to compare Exmouth against Blackpool. We wanted to try and compare a South West offer with other South West seaside towns and resorts so we can see where we are.”

Umm…and the answer to the question is…?!

“Post-truth’ politics are a debasement of standards in public life”

“Verbal dexterity, inconsistency and ‘spin’ are part and parcel of normal politics but the exaggerations and distortions of the EU referendum campaign has led to concerns about ‘post-truth’ politics.

Nicholas Allen and Sarah Birch write there is a need for someone to provide a moral lead, and argue the Committee for Standards in Public Life could play a valuable role by establishing some relevant basic markers. …

… current trends, first identified in the context of US politics and more recently in the context of British politics, risk stretching beyond breaking-point a basic commitment to truth and honesty that is essential for liberal democracy. Without it, citizens cannot hope to achieve ‘enlightened understanding’ and learn about what best serve their interests, one of five criteria identified by Robert Dahl that define modern democratic government. Someone in government, or at least in officialdom, needs to take note. Someone needs to provide a moral lead. …

… Morality in politics needs to come from somewhere. The CSPL [Committee for Standards in Public Life] is charged with overseeing standards in public life. The new prime minister should give it the resources and remit to do just this.

‘Post-truth’ politics are a debasement of standards in public life

EDDC “Communications”: pigs, flying, sky …. and ” avoiding the barking mad”!

Here is the introduction to EDDC’s new communications policy:

Communications Plan 2016-2020

… Purpose and scope of the communications plan

This plan aims to ensure we have good communications which improve residents’ lives, keep them informed and help them access services more easily.

This plan will help develop EDDC’s brand so that it becomes instantly recognisable and synonymous with our council plan priorities, values and key drivers of great customer service and value for money services in an outstanding place.

The more we involve and tell people about what we are doing and why, the better more informed they will feel. We have a great story to tell and we need to tell it well – this means effectively and consistently. …

Addressing local priorities

This plan aims to deliver effective communications to our customers. We strongly believe that customers who are informed about our services and benefits are more positive in their view of the Council than those who are not so informed.

Our Council Plan outlines that we will ‘continuously improve to be an outstanding council’ and that we will ‘prioritise keeping our residents informed’.

This communication plan will support the communication of the priorities and outcomes in the Council Plan:

 Encouraging communities to be outstanding
 Developing an outstanding local economy
 Delivering and promoting our outstanding environment
 Continuously improving to be an outstanding council

Principles underpinning this action plan:
 Communication and reputation management is a top-table issue

It’s about avoiding the ‘barking mad’ by thinking about everything we do and everything we say/don’t say from a reputation management perspective

 Stop talking about ‘they’ and start talking about ‘we’!

 We are all responsible for reputation management and communications.

 We think about different audiences: residents, members, officers, towns and
parishes, partners, business groups. …”

Click to access 280616-overview-agenda-combined.pdf

Whoops, big omission: they missed out developers from the last sentence!