John Crace, Guardian (humourist) columnist – but actually far, far too close to the truth.

“Left hand meet right hand. Just weeks after the prime minister insisted there was no extra spare cash for schools, the education secretary came to the Commons to make a statement on how she had miraculously found more money for schools.

Being a minority government is proving to be a very expensive drug habit for the Tories.

As is traditional with any U-turn, Justine Greening began by saying that everything was basically running brilliantly. Teachers had never been happier, pupils had never been happier.

Then came the but.

But she had listened to the concerns that people had raised during the election and had managed to come up with an extra £1.3bn over the next two years to offset any unfairness in a system that was definitely, totally fair.

“Let me be clear,” she said. “This is additional funding.” She had gone head-to-head with the chancellor, and Freewheelin’ Phil had blinked first. She’d tipped him upside down and a DUP-sized bung had fallen out of his pockets.

Only she hadn’t. At this point, Greening’s triumphal tone became more of the mumble of a remedial reading class. Barely audible were the words “efficiency savings”, “no cost to the taxpayer” and “transparently”.

So much of Greening’s statement had been barely audible that it took a while for the shadow education secretary, Angela Rayner, to actually make any sense of what had been said.

Justine Greening raids free schools budget for £1.3bn education bailout
It was only after mistakenly welcoming the “new money” that it dawned on her that nothing about the money was new. She hastily corrected herself and inquired where the savings were going to be made. Had the government finally admitted that its free schools programme was a bit of a waste of money?

“We’re not cutting the free schools programme,” Greening replied. The very idea. “It’s just we’re financing it in a different way.”

In a way that it would have £200m less. Even some of her own backbenchers had the grace to look embarrassed by this. Either the education secretary didn’t understand basic maths or she didn’t understand basic English.

Conservative Robert Halfon, the new chair of the education select committee, was quick to spot that, even after cutting £200m from the free schools budget, there was still £1.1bn of savings unaccounted for. Did she have any idea what other programmes she would need to cut?

Not really, Greening replied. There were a lot of different programmes and sooner or later she would get round to working out which ones were pointless and then she’d make the cuts accordingly. All she could promise for now was that the savings would definitely come in at £1.3bn in total.

It was quite some admission, as Greening rather fancies her chances of taking over from Theresa May.

Telling parliament she had been presiding over a government department that has been happily wasting £1.3bn a year, without feeling the need to do anything about it up till now, might not be the smartest job interview. There again, she isn’t up against the stiffest of opposition. The gene pool of available talent in the Conservative party is vanishingly small.

Having basically informed everyone that she wasn’t particularly good at her job, it was little surprise that everything rather went downhill for Greening from then on.

Labour’s Lucy Powell and the Liberal Democrats’ Ed Davey tried to help her out.

Let’s not worry about whether the £1.3bn was new or old money, they said. They understood that difference might be too nuanced for her. Let’s concentrate instead on the fact that £1.3bn is still going to be at least £1.7bn short of the figure the National Audit Office had said was required to maintain funding at its current levels, given rising costs and pupil numbers.

“Er …” Greening struggled. Er … All she could say was that under the new arrangements schools would be getting £1.3bn more than they had been getting an hour ago – apart from those whose budgets had been cut to provide the extra money for all the others – and it would be a big help if people could just be a bit more positive about the announcement.

Not even her own backbenchers could go along with that, and one after the other stood up to inquire if the unfairness in the funding formula would be addressed in their own constituencies.

Greening didn’t seem to have the answer to this. Or anything much. The government is now so weak that even what are intended to be good news statements are going down like a cup of cold sick.”

https://www.theguardian.com/global/2017/jul/17/tory-magic-money-tree-allows-justine-greening-to-splash-cash-on-schools

“Tory MPs Stop Public Submitting Petitions To Government Until At Least September”

“Members of the public are unable to submit any petitions to Parliament this summer thanks to Tory MPs.

Conservative backbenchers are delaying elections to Parliamentary committees until September – including the one which runs the petition website.

No new petitions have been allowed since Parliament broke up for the election on May 3, and all those open at the time were closed.

Mark Hunt, Communications Director at the charity Meningitis Now, is frustrated this vital tool for the public to put pressure on MPs is unavailable.

The charity helped sign up more than 823,000 people to a petition calling for the meningitis B vaccine to be given to all children after two-year-old Faye Burdett died just 11 days after contracting the illness.

Hunt said: “For us, the e-petition provided an open and transparent process for challenging government thinking around a topical and genuine issue, and whilst the petition didn’t succeed in its stated aim, it made the process of democracy more open and transparent.

“Having witnessed and been part of the e-petition process and the way that it gave the general public the chance to express its views, it would seem to be a retrograde step to postpone or deny them this opportunity even in the short term.”

The elections to parliamentary committees are organised by the Tories backbench 1922 Committee – but that body only held its own vote today on who should fill the officer positions needed to run the elections.

Should the Tories wish, they could hold the parliamentary committee elections before the summer recess – which starts on Thursday – but it has been reported the whips office are delaying the process.

Tory MP Julian Lewis – re-elected chair of the Defence Select Committee – last week resorted to asking Commons Speaker John Bercow for his help in moving the process along.

Bercow replied: “If memory serves me correctly, what the officers of the 1922 Committee usually do in respect of their party—perhaps something similar operates in other parties—is simply oversee the count.

“Whether the officers of the 1922 Committee have or have not been elected is not a matter for the Chair—that is a party matter—but, frankly, overseeing the count does not require Einsteinian qualities; it is a pretty prosaic task.

“I do not think it would be right to say that the resources of the House could be made available in what is essentially the oversight of a matter undertaken by parties.

“However, it would seem to be perfectly feasible, if my colleagues, the Deputy Speakers, were so willing, that they and I could volunteer our services to oversee the count, if the House thought that that would be helpful.

“My basic point stands: do colleagues want these Committees to be set up sooner rather than later?

“If they do not, that is a pity, but if they do, those of us who are of good will and can be relied upon to conduct the count perfectly fairly, would, I suspect, be very happy to offer our services.

Labour MP Helen Jones was re-elected chairman of the Petitions Committee last week, and spoke of her frustration that the system is in limbo.

She said: “The petitions site had to close when Parliament stopped unexpectedly for the general election. I know that this has been frustrating for many people.

“The site will open again once the new Petitions Committee is set up, so it’s essential that the Committee is established as soon as possible.

“This isn’t something that I can control, but I’ll be doing everything I can make sure that petitioners don’t have to wait longer than is absolutely necessary.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/tory-mps-petitions-government_uk_596ce991e4b0e983c057e8e8?

Local government “needs tough questions” … but what about the answers?

Owl says: but what happens when people simply refuse to answer those tough questions because they have their employees and/or their council majority councillors under such tough control they can over-ride those tough questions by just ignoring them or spinning nonsensical responses!

“Good governance across the public sector requires people who are willing to ask tough questions, CIPFA conference delegates heard today.

Peter Welch, director of the European Court of Auditors, speaking at an afternoon workshop on governance failures, responded to a question asking why there was a “fundamental lack of understanding of role and responsibility” across the public sector.

“If we want governance to really work we really need people who are not afraid to ask tough questions,” he said.

Panellists and the audience talked about the lack of diversity in public sector auditing.

Welch said “diversity works” to ensure there are people in organisations to ask the tough questions.”

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2017/07/cipfa-conference-good-governance-requires-tough-questions

Don’t let (tax avoiding) Google influence your views

Google spends millions on academic research to influence opinion, says watchdog

“Google has spent millions funding academic research in the US and Europe to try to influence public opinion and policymakers, a watchdog has claimed.

Over the last decade, Google has funded research papers that appear to support the technology company’s business interests and defend against regulatory challenges such as antitrust and anti-piracy, the US-based Campaign for Accountability (CfA) said in a report.

“Google uses its immense wealth and power to attempt to influence policymakers at every level,” said Daniel Stevens, CfA executive director. “At a minimum, regulators should be aware that the allegedly independent legal and academic work on which they rely has been brought to them by Google.”

In its Google Academics Inc report, the CfA identified 329 research papers published between 2005 and 2017 on public policy that the company had funded. Such studies have been authored by academics and economists from some of the world’s leading institutions including Oxford, Edinburgh, Stanford, Harvard, MIT and the Berlin School of Economics.

Academics were directly funded by Google in more than half of the cases and in the rest of the cases funded indirectly by groups or institutions supported by Google, the CfA said. Authors, who were paid between $5,000 and $400,000 (£3,900-£310,000) by Google, did not disclose the source of their funding in 66% of all cases, and in 26% of those cases directly funded by Google, according to the report.

The CfA is calling for Google-funded academics to disclose the source of their funding to ensure their work can be evaluated in context.

Google described the report as “highly misleading” as it included any work supported by any organisation to which it has ever donated money. …”

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/jul/13/google-millions-academic-research-influence-opinion

Tax avoidance:
http://www.itv.com/news/2017-03-31/google-accused-of-being-less-than-transparent-after-revealing-latest-uk-tax-payments/

Crime czar Alison Hernandez does U-turn and puts deputy plan “on hold”

“Crime czar Alison Hernandez has bowed to pressure and abandoned a plan to appoint a Tory colleague from her local council days as her second-in-command. The Devon and Cornwall Police and Crime Commissioner asked the police and crime panel to rubber stamp the appointment of fellow Conservative and Torbay councillor Mark Kingscote on Friday.

Ms Hernandez wanted the 55-year-old NHS support worker, who specialises in mental health, to help her with the workload on a £30,000 salary.

But, amid concerns over his qualifications for the role and controversy over a tweet referring to lesbians as “lesbos”, the the panel of councillors rejected the proposal.

Mr Kingscote’s tasteless tweet was covered here by EDW:
https://eastdevonwatch.org/2017/07/08/the-police-and-crime-panel-and-that-tweet/

The hearing heard how the attempted appointment “smacked of nepotism”.

After a private meeting, the panel concluded that Kingscote – a staunch Conservative who once chained himself to a set of railings to protest about the downfall of his hero, Margaret Thatcher, “does not meet minimum requirements of the post”.

The ruling capped a bruising week for Ms Hernandez, in which a council voted she should be removed from her role for making “stupid and dangerous” comments about guns.

Plymouth City Council’s Labour group tabled a vote of no confidence in Alison Hernandez, saying they are “extremely alarmed” at her stance on how to tackle terrorists.

Ms Hernandez was not bound by the panel’s decision, which was revealed to the commissioner in a letter received yesterday.

However, she risked making enemies of a group which is constituted to oversee her work, placing her a loggerheads for the final three years of her tenure.

In a statement released today, Ms Hernandez accepted the decision and said she “has put plans to appoint a deputy on hold”.

“I am disappointed that the Panel did not feel able to support my choice of deputy but I am willing to accept its recommendation,” she said. “I will now spend some time contemplating my next move and will await the appointment of a new chief executive before making a decision.”

“I would like to thank Mark Kingscote for being willing to consider taking on this challenge on behalf of the people of Devon, Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly and I believe he would have served the people of our counties and islands well.”

Read Alison Hernandez’s letter to the panel:

Deputy Police and Crime Commissioner Confirmation Hearing Report

Thank you for your letter of 11th July following the confirmation hearing on 7th July.

I am disappointed that the Panel does not feel able to support my choice of deputy. However, while I feel there are some misunderstandings around both the role, and the process of appointment, I reluctantly accept the recommendation and will not be appointing Mark Kingscote as my deputy Police and Crime Commissioner.

The Panel represents our communities across Devon, Cornwall and the Isles of
Scilly and I absolutely respect the views of its members but, if you will allow me, I think it would be helpful to respond to the points raised about Mark Kingscote’s suitability.

In relation to estates, I require someone who can assist with the strategic overview of the planning and investment part of the process not the day to day maintenance. So while I can see that you may doubt his track record in estate management, I did feel Mark had the necessary experience in estate development as he has successfully steered multi-million pound planning applications.

On the second point Mark has apologised for his poor choice of words while using Twitter. Please be assured he did not mean to insult, offend or be discriminatory and he is sad that he was unable to convince the Panel of this.

Finally, and perhaps most importantly, I must address your point about working councillors. I am determined to encourage more working people to become elected councillors so that our communities can be better represented. Elected roles cannot only be for the retired, unemployed or wealthy. I myself worked after being elected and I strongly believe that Mark would have been able to serve both Torbay residents and the wider population of Devon, Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly well.

I will now spend some time contemplating my next move and will await the
appointment of a new chief executive before making a decision.

I look forward to seeing you in August at confirmation hearings for both the new Treasurer and CEO. Thank you for finding the time in your diary to enable this to happen outside of the normal schedule of meetings.

Yours sincerely
Alison Hernandez
Police and Crime Commissioner
Devon, Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly”

http://www.devonlive.com/crime-czar-alison-hernandez-performs-u-turn-on-unfit-deputy/story-30436982-detail/story.html

Local authorities must submit to robust scrutiny says Communities Secretary

… conveniently forgetting that it has always been his job to ensure that this happens!

“Local government needs to open up and raise its game, Sajid Javid has told the Local Government Association’s annual conference.

Delivering a keynote address to the gathering in Birmingham yesterday, Javid highlighted the “serious failings” that emerged in the aftermath of the Grenfell tower fire in west London and said he wanted to reflect on what had gone wrong in local government.

“If the events of the past few weeks have taught us anything, it’s that we have to raise our game,” he said. “The ties that bind local government to local communities have not snapped. But if we don’t act now, such a time may one day be upon us.”

Councils would not be able to rebuild and reinforce trust with local communities if they hid away from public scrutiny.

“If people are going to trust their elected representatives, they have to see them working in the harsh light of the public eye, not in comforting shadows behind closed doors.

“Not only must democracy exist, it must be seen to exist. It can’t be about decisions made in private meeting rooms… local government must show it is for the people – not just of the people.” …”

Words – so much easier than action, as we well know in East Devon.

Oh, those poor, poor developers with their begging bowls

“Documents show plans to create 36 sheltered apartments for the elderly should be worth nearly £1million to the Sidmouth community – but the developer has shown it is ‘unviable’ to pay more than £41,000.

Churchill Retirement Living hopes to demolish the former Green Close care home in Drakes Avenue to make way for the development.

Its five-figure offer towards off-site ‘affordable’ housing was slammed as an ‘insult to Sidmouth’ by town councillors, who suggested the developer should pay at least £360,000.

After failing to reach an agreement with East Devon District Council (EDDC), Churchill launched an appeal due to non-determination of its application.

Papers submitted to the appeal process from EDDC say there is a policy expectation that half of the site should be provided as ‘affordable’ housing and that there is a ‘substantial’ need for one- and two-bedroom units in Sidmouth.

If 18 ‘affordable’ homes cannot be provided on-site, a payment of £935,201 would be expected so the properties can be built elsewhere.

Churchill said a viability assessment showed building ‘affordable’ homes on the site was ‘impractical’ and ‘unrealistic’.

It added: “It has been demonstrated that the application development is not sufficiently viable to permit the imposition of any affordable housing or planning gain contributions above £41,208.”

An EDDC spokeswoman said: “Unfortunately, the development is not sufficiently viable to pay this [£935,201] sum and, following an independent assessment of the viability of the scheme, it was reluctantly accepted that the scheme could only afford to pay £41,208 towards affordable housing.

“Under government guidance, we are required to reduce our requirements where a development is unviable and so we have no real choice but to accept this position.”

EDDC also expected Churchill to pay £22,536 for habitat mitigation, plus an £18,400 public open space contribution. The total is nearly £1million.

The delay in EDDC deciding the fate of the application was due to officers trying to apply an ‘overage’ clause that would require Churchill to pay up if its profits exceed current expectations.

A Planning Inspectorate spokesman confirmed that the appeal had been validated and it is in discussion with both parties.”

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/eddc-wants-1million-in-community-cash-developer-offers-40-000-1-5084604

A northern Tory councillor and his view on devolved power

Tomorrow I’ll be toddling across to Leeds where, among other momentous matters, the West Yorkshire Combined Authority with consider whether to change its name to Leeds City Region Combined Authority. This has caused a ripple of disgruntlement in my city as people ask quite why this decision is being taken now and whether it marks the end of Bradford’s separate and individual identity.

I don’t like the proposal. Mostly this is because it is totally unnecessary. We’re told by officers that the current brand (essentially ‘West Yorkshire’) is confusing because there’s another brand – ‘Leeds City Region Local Enterprise Partnership’ – within the purview of the combined authority and having two brands might be confusing for high-powered, multi-million pound wielding international business folk wanting to invest. That and all the others are named after cities (well Sheffield, Manchester and Liverpool at least but not Birmingham and Bristol).

The report tells us that the basis for the change results from ‘comprehensive research’:

“…benchmarking the WYCA against other combined authorities nationally or internationally, an audit of existing communications activity by the organisation, and substantial engagement with audiences including elected members, local authority chief executives, private sector business leaders, central government officials, partner organisations and WYCA employees.”

Sounds good – just the sort of paragraph I’d have put into a client presentation about research when I didn’t have any budget. What we have here is a series of chats with existing connections such as members of the LEP, political leaders (but not opposition leaders) in the West Yorkshire councils and senior officials who we work with. There’s no script, no presentation of findings, no suggestion that we’ve done anything other than ask the opinion of a few people who we already know.

In the grand scale of things all this probably doesn’t matter much. Except that, for us in Bradford at least, we’ll begin to recognise that plenty of decisions previously made by councillors here in Bradford are now made somewhere else (Leeds) by a different organisation. This – as councillors on Bradford’s area committees have discovered – includes mundane and very local stuff like whether or not to put speed bumps on a street in Cullingworth.

What annoys me most about this stuff is that we are gradually replacing accountable political decision-making with technocratic, officer-led decisions. So us councillors, for example, get pressure to put in speed cameras but have precisely zero say in whether and where such cameras are actually installed. Somewhere in the documentation of the soon-to-be Leeds City Region Combined Authority there’ll be a line of budget referring to the West Yorkshire Casulaty Reduction Partnership. That is what ‘member decision-making’ means most of the time these days.

So to return to the name change. I’ll be opposed because it’s unnecessary nd divisive. But when it goes through (I love that they’re planning an extensive ‘member engagement’ after they’ve made the decision) it will at least be a reminder that most of the big investment decisions out there are being made on the basis of Heseltine’s ‘functional economic geography’ rather than using the democratically-elected local councils we all know and love. OK, not love- that’s going too far – but you know what I mean.”

http://theviewfromcullingworth.blogspot.co.uk/2017/06/so-is-bradford-part-of-leeds-on.html

“Labour slams ‘stupid and dangerous’ Tory crime czar as ‘unfit’ for office”

Owl says: at last someone prepared to say that this particular Empress has no professional clothes!

“Labour has called for the sacking of the Tory crime czar after her comments about armed citizens taking on terrorist attackers.

A group of Plymouth councillors have said Devon and Cornwall’s Police and Crime Commissioner should be removed from her role for making “stupid and dangerous” comments about guns.

The group is pushing for a vote of no confidence in Alison Hernandez, saying they are “extremely alarmed” at her stance on how to tackle terrorists.

Earlier this month Ms Hernandez said vigilantes with guns could be part of the “solution” – but later insisted the interview had been misinterpreted.

Labour is preparing to table a motion at next week’s council meeting calling for action.

“Ms Hernandez’s statement that she would ‘really be interested’ in the suggestion shows she is unfit and unsuitable for office,” a spokesman said.

“We endorse Deputy Chief Constable Paul Netherton’s view that it would be ‘definitely an emphatic no’ to non-police officers taking up arms.

“A proposal to utilise domestically owned firearms is a crass and inadequate response to mounting concerns about police cuts.

“In particular it is an inadequate response to the previously reported removal of a large number of armed officers. This in turn is exacerbated by the removal of the ‘eyes and ears of the force’, the PCSOs and beat officers.”

READ MORE: Machete wielding man in gas mask wrestled to ground by brave neighbours after spate of fires

The motion calls for the council’s chief executive to write to the Home Secretary asking her to “remove Ms Hernandez from office, allowing Devon and Cornwall Police to continue the fight against crime, including terrorist threats, without these stupid and dangerous comments being made.”

The councillors also want to write to the Devon and Cornwall Police and Crime Panel Chair requesting he tables an urgent vote of no confidence in Ms Hernandez at their next full meeting.

A spokesman for Ms Hernandez’ office said: “There has been no official notification of any Plymouth City Council motion concerning the Police and Crime Commissioner.

“Should a motion be tabled, any response from the commissioner will be made through the appropriate channels.”

http://www.devonlive.com/labour-slams-stupid-and-dangerous-tory-crime-czar-as-unfit-for-office/story-30411471-detail/story.html

“Ordinary people” – millionaires!

“This morning’s BBC Breakfast show contained an absolutely astounding series of interviews about the the Tories’ hated Dementia Tax policy and the state of the NHS.

What the BBC failed to mention during the course of both sections is that their supposedly ‘impartial’ voice of concern for the NHS (a man who the BBC described as ‘loving the NHS’ was actually an ex-Tory Councillor, millionaire property mogul who had worked for a PRIVATE healthcare company for 33 years.

The ex-Tory Councillor was interviewed both as a seemingly ordinary member of the public at 07:25, saying the council had been “phenomenal” when his wife was diagnosed with dementia and needed help, and just an hour later he returned in a pre-recorded segment debating the future of the NHS with a junior Dr who was distraught at the destruction caused the Tory cuts.

The first discussion was about Theresa May’s disgusting dementia tax. The interview starts with another member of the public expressing deep concerns about the cap on social care, saying she is worried that her children will be left with nothing if her or her husband have to go into care.

The conversation then moves on to a man who is referred to just as “Gordon”, and he speaks about his experience of funding care for his wife who he says was diagnosed with dementia in 2009.

The conversation then moves on to a man who is referred to just as “Gordon”, and he speaks about his experience of funding care for his wife who he says was diagnosed with dementia in 2009.

Gordon Maclellan BBCHe says that he found the local council to be “phenomenal” in offering him and his wife support to help fund her care. He goes on to say that he would certainly benefit from the Tories proposals to raise the cap on care costs from £23,000 to £100,000.

Just over an hour later on the same programme, we encounter another interview with the same man, or to give him his full title Dr Gordon Maclellan, who introduces himself as being recently retired.

This time he’s here to talk about the NHS crisis and discuss the best way to fix it with a 33-year-old junior doctor.

Breakfast describes Maclellan as being somebody who “loves the NHS”, and the purpose of the segment is to help people decide which party is best suited to cure the NHS crisis.

Throughout the interview, Gordon consistently uses classic Tory talking points and the usual ridiculous defenses of their carving up of the NHS, at one point he defends the Tories cuts by saying:

“people died in my day too”

So, who is this Gordon Maclellan? And why does he always seem to keen to defend the Tories? …

… Dr Gordon MacLellan worked as a Private Orthopaedic consultant for the Nuffield Health Brentwood Hospital for 33 years.”

http://www.devonlive.com/five-sets-of-roadworks-to-affect-major-devon-roads-next-week/story-30381759-detail/story.html

Tory defence minister slams Corbyn for things said by Boris Johnson!

And this twit is our Defence Secretary? Build your bunkers!

“Defence Secretary Michael Fallon was left red-faced on live television when he slammed Boris Johnson’s statement on terrorism thinking that the quote was made by Jeremy Corbyn.

The Tory Cabinet member began attacking the Labour leader on Channel 4 News last night in response to Mr Corbyn saying we have to admit that the ‘war on terror is not working’.

Channel 4 presenter Krishnan Guru-Murthy asked Mr Fallon to respond to another quote: ‘Isn’t it possible that things like the Iraq war did not create the problem of murderous Islamic fundamentalists, though the war has unquestionably sharpened the resentments felt by such people in this country and given them a new pretext?

Thinking the quote had been made as part of the Labour leader’s speech, Mr Fallon took the opportunity to dismiss and condemn the words. He said: ‘Well they are not entitled to excuses.’ But the words were actually said by Boris Johnson in response to the 7/7 bombings in London in 2005.

Mr Guru-Murthy said: ‘What I just put to you was not Jeremy Corbyn, it was Boris Johnson.’

The presenter then read out more quotes from Boris Johnson that put a blushing Mr Fallon in even more of a pickle. Mr Guru-Murthy said: ‘He goes on to say, “The Iraq war did not introduce the poison into our bloodstream but, yes, the war did help to potentiate that poison”. “It is difficult to deny that they have a point, the ‘told-you-so’ brigade”.’

The Defence Secretary then got his words jumbled as he tried to explain his way out of the blunder. He said: ‘Well I don’t agree with that.’

Mr Guru-Murthy was quick to ensure Mr Fallon continued to enlarge the hole he had dug for himself.

The presenter said: ‘So Boris Johnson, the foreign secretary, is wrong?’
When Mr Fallon refused to agree, on the premise that he did not have the direct quote in front of him, Mr Guru-Murthy watched the politician squirm as he continued to press him.

The presenter said he didn’t understand how the politician could refrain from commenting on the words when he had just heard them read out.

Speaking in London yesterday Mr Corbyn, who opposed the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan as well as air strikes against terrorist targets in Syria, said Labour would ‘change what we do abroad’ if it won power.

He stressed that the link between foreign policy and terrorism ‘in no way reduces the guilt of those who attack our children’ and could not ‘remotely excuse, or even adequately explain, outrages like this week’s massacre’.
Terrorist Salman Abedi killed 22 people and injured 119 when he blew himself up at an Ariana Grande concert in Manchester Arena on Monday evening.”

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4547198/Tory-Defence-Secretary-accidentally-slams-Boris-Johnson.html

Northern community boycotts local paper over Tory wrap-around ad

The Express and Echo was also guilty of publishing this ad, which coincidentally covered over the REAL front page detailing a local planning scandal!

“Hundreds of people have signed a petition demanding a weekly newspaper apologises for running a front page wraparound promoting the Conservative Party as the row over the adverts rumbles on.

The Westmorland Gazette was one of many regional newspapers to run the wrap last week ahead of Thursday’s local elections, but has now come under fire from readers who have demanded a full front page apology and threatened to boycott the paper until it complies.

The petition’s Avaaz page reads: “As regular readers of the Westmorland Gazette we are dismayed to see OUR community paper being misused for party political purposes.

“Whilst we would welcome balanced representation of all LOCAL candidates within the paper, we feel strongly that a front page advert for a single national party is not acceptable (especially when published on a polling day (4/5/17)!).

“We request that you publish a full front page apology in your next issue. Please note that many of us will be boycotting the paper until this occurs.”

The adverts coincided with the local elections, as readers went to the polls for council and mayoral elections.”

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/westmorland-gazette-newspaper-front-page-tory-advert-local-elections-conservatives-apology-readers-a7725816.html

How to manipulate local “news”

“The Conservatives have spent tens of thousands of pounds buying wraparound adverts on local newspapers across the country, pushing deep into Labour-held constituencies with a tactic that shows both the ambition of their election campaign and the party’s ability to make the most of legal loopholes in campaign spending rules.

More than a dozen titles across the country owned by major newspaper publishing companies – including Johnston Press and Daily Mirror owner Trinity Mirror – carried the wraparound adverts on Wednesday and Thursday. The four-page adverts, which replace the newspapers’ own front pages, barely mention the word “Conservatives” and instead focus on Theresa May’s leadership and the promise of Brexit.

As long as the adverts in local papers do not reference the local candidate or local issues, they are considered to be exempt from strict local constituency spending budgets, which can be as low as £12,000 per candidate for the entire campaign. Instead the Conservatives are able to count the adverts as “national spending”, which comes under the party’s central campaign spending limit of around £19 million.

https://www.buzzfeed.com/jimwaterson/how-the-conservatives-are-using-local-adverts-to-get-around

Why voters must think for themselves

The focus of this article is Brexit but it could be anything – the NHS, education, the environment, foreign policy.

It’s about how shady companies manipulate news and advertising to serve the ends of those who employ them and how together they can create a fake world that people can be influenced by without realising it is happening, so good are they at the job.

Don’t let social media or newspapers or politicians with particular allegiances tell you what to think – don’t even let East Devon Watch tell you what to think! Look around you, see for yourself, listen to different views (the more different to yours the better), think about how your life is now and how you would wish it to be for yourself and others in future – then put your cross in the box that fits best with that vision.

“ …the capacity for this science [data analytics] to be used to manipulate emotions is very well established. This is military-funded technology that has been harnessed by a global plutocracy and is being used to sway elections in ways that people can’t even see, don’t even realise is happening to them,” she says. “It’s about exploiting existing phenomenon like nationalism and then using it to manipulate people at the margins. To have so much data in the hands of a bunch of international plutocrats to do with it what they will is absolutely chilling.

“We are in an information war and billionaires are buying up these companies, which are then employed to go to work in the heart of government. That’s a very worrying situation.”

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/may/07/the-great-british-brexit-robbery-hijacked-democracy

Voters beware personalised Facebook spam from political parties

“A tool exposing how voters are targeted with tailored propaganda on Facebook has been launched in response to what is likely to be the most extensive social media campaign in general election history.

Experts in digital campaigning, including an adviser to Labour in 2015, have designed a program to allow voters to shine a light into what they describe as “a dark, unregulated corner of our political campaigns”.

The free software, called Who Targets Me?, can be added to a Google Chrome browser and will allow voters to track how the main parties insert political messages into their Facebook feeds calibrated to appeal on the basis of personal information they have already made public online.”

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2017/may/03/free-software-reveal-facebook-election-posts-targeted-chrome-extension

Midweek Herald manages 2 sentences on Colyton Village Plan story that took half a page in Western Morning News!

No boat-rocking investigative journalism here! Actually, no journalism at all! See if you can spot it:

How did TV companies get to Knowle so quickly?

How were BBC Devon and Westcountry News able to get to Knowle so quickly when the Exmouth “regeneration” Development Management Committee didn’t start its meeting till 10 am yet Mark Williams was able to give an interview for the 1.30 pm edition of Spotlight and one that appeared on West Country News at 6 pm? And TV cameras were inside the meeting too.

Somehow they never seemed to be interested in the public’s protests about the same issues ….. though West Country News did at least balance the news today with local campaigners who were in disagreement with the decision.

And should Mark Williams have said he favours Grenadier’s watersports centre – after specifically naming them in his interview – isn’t he supposed to be neutral?

MPs and conflict of interest: there’s no conflict if it is in their interests!

Hugo Swire says in his most recent blog that we should not worry about his mate George Osborne’s £650,000 job with a gigantic hedge fund (Blackrock). He says:

“… At Blackrock, his main job will be to advise on economic matters and to represent the company in a social capacity. As for abandoning his constituents, I shouldn’t think the hours he puts in will be any less than those of when he was Chancellor which, I might add, was also a second job and quite a considerable one at that! …”

https://www.hugoswire.org.uk/news/blog-greed-george-osborne

However, the Guardian newspaper has a different take on the matter:

” …the potential for conflicts of interest are enormous. Here is just one obvious example: BlackRock owns about 10% of AstraZeneca, the pharmaceutical firm at the centre of a political storm when US rival Pfizer launched an unsuccessful £69bn bid in 2014. If, for example, BlackRock had wished the takeover to go ahead, who better to have on board to assess the potential political reaction – and advise on ways around it – than the former chancellor?

Add in the fact that the same man is now editor of the Evening Standard – the City’s evening newspaper – and his influence is magnified further. When deals that can generate profits measured in hundreds of millions are on the table, Osborne’s £650k is a mere trifle. …


BlackRock … by numbers

BlackRock has a stake in every FTSE 100 company, worth a total of £145bn.
That means it owns nearly 8% of the UK’s leading share index. Its investment in the FTSE 100 accounts for around 3.5% of its total assets of £4trn. Its biggest stake by value is its £9bn investment in HSBC, its smallest a £9.3m shareholding in medical group Convatec.

Other shareholdings worth more than £5bn are AstraZeneca, British American Tobacco, GlaxoSmithKline, and the two classes of Royal Dutch Shell shares.

In percentage terms, its top holdings are Next (nearly 14%), BHP Billiton (13.29%), information group Relx (12.88%), Land Securities (12.46%), building materials group CRH (12.46%), cruise company Carnival (12.19%), gold miner Randgold Resource (nearly 12%), easyJet (11.83%), technology group Johnson Matthey (11.83%), and Severn Trent (11.55%).

It is the biggest shareholder in more than half of the FTSE 100’s companies: Ashtead, Aviva, AstraZeneca, British American Tobacco, British Land, BHP Billiton, BP, Burberry, Centrica, Compass, Croda, CRH, Diageo, Direct Line, Experian, GKN, GlaxoSmithKline, Hammerson, HSBC, 3i, Imperial Brands, Intertek, Johnson Matthey, Kingfisher, Land Securities, Legal & General, Lloyds Banking Group, London Stock Exchange, Marks & Spencer, Mondi, National Grid, Next, Persimmon, Royal Dutch Shell A and B shares, Relx, Royal Mail, Randgold Resources, Sage, Shire, St James’s Place, Standard Life, Smiths Group, Scottish Mortgage Investment Trust, Smith & Nephew, Severn Trent, Tesco, Unilever, Vodafone, Worldpay, and WPP.
(Source: Thomson Reuters)

Its joint venture infrastructure investments include a business park at Heathrow, windfarms bought from Centrica, solar farms in Derbyshire and Essex and a £75m loan to Trafford Housing Trust.”

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/apr/06/why-worlds-largest-fund-manager-paying-george-osborne-650000-pounds

Public ‘not excited by devolution’ says firm of consultants

Owl says: They missed the main point: we have sussed out that finance and decisions are being moved from elected, accountable local authorities to groups of unelected and unaccountable, greedy (and sometimes shady) business people. But then again this is a report from a consultancy firm – which probably is getting, or hopes for, los of business from Local Enterprise Partnerships!

“The public is becoming increasingly disengaged with devolution despite its political priority for the government, research from consultancy firm GK Strategy has found.

A state-of-the-nation report on devolution in England found that whilst the agenda continues to be a political priority for the government, the prospect of further powers and accountability being shifted to a local level has failed to capture the public’s attention.

Yesterday’s report states “devolution has so far failed to win over the hearts and minds of people” because of a consistent reluctance by Whitehall to relinquish control over public spending.

Researchers explain that where local authorities do have greater control, they are working with smaller budgets and having to do more with less.

The perception that devolution is “merely passing the buck” of spending cuts to local authorities may be another reason why the concept has failed to capture public interest. …

… According to the researchers, there are two likely reasons for the level of disengagement with the concept of devolution, both of which are closely associated with the specific roles of elected mayors.

Firstly, the two largest English cities outside of London – Manchester and Birmingham – both voted against having an elected mayor less than five years ago in a referendum in each city.

Secondly, the public lacks a clear understanding over the role of the mayor in relation to the devolution process and the elected councils.

Chief executive of GK Strategy, Emily Wallace, said: “Our research clearly shows that whilst devolution in England has been a project of successive UK governments and been broadly supported by all major parties, it has failed to capture people’s interest in the way other issues have.

“A number of factors lie behind this, but a common view is that devolution in England has been delegation of blame at a time of public spending consolidation, rather than delegation of power and responsibility.”

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2017/04/public-not-excited-devolution

Devon Tories are running scared

How does Owl know?

Sajid Javid was in Devon today drumming up support for their DCC manifesto.

Once upon a time, Devon was such a safe county that there would have been no need whatsoever for the big guns from national government. Bringing them in now shows just how frightened they are this time around.

Wonder what Leader John Hart thought about the bloke who has helped strip his council to the bone pretending all is well?

And that photo of ex-Monster Raving Loony Hughes, austerity-cutter Javid, worried-looking Hart and super-cool (not!) Swire:

m

Really, if you are looking for a reason NOT to vote Tory (sensible people vote true Independent or, if no Independent is standing the person who would have expected to come second to a Tory, whatever party) this is the photo you should carry around in your wallet!

http://www.devonlive.com/sajid-javid-launches-devon-8217-s-manifesto/story-30246363-detail/story.html