Devon and Cornwall Police under- reporting crimes – by up to 17,400 per year

Isn’t this just the sort of thing Ms Hernandez, our Police and Crime Commissioner, is supposed to be making sure doesn’t happen?

Does she have a plan?

East Devon District Council has a former copper (Councillor Tom Wright) on the committee she reports to – perhaps he could ask her.

However, as this committee met recently only to set the police precept and its next meeting, scheduled for 7 April 2017* has already been cancelled:

http://web.plymouth.gov.uk/modgov?modgovlink=http%3A%2F%2Fdemocracy.plymouth.gov.uk%2FieListMeetings.aspx%3FCommitteeId%3D1051

that might prove to be a bit difficult.

* surely this meeting has not been cancelled to avoid bad news for the Tories just before DCC elections?

The Plymouth Herald covers the story here:

http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/rape-and-child-abuse-not-being-recorded-by-police/story-30121826-detail/story.html

and says:

Inspectors said the force had “no excuse” for the failings and had failed to act on many of the recommendations it had made three years ago.

The story on the BBC Live website:

“Devon and Cornwall police are failing victims of crime by not recording thousands of offences, including rape and serious assaults, an official report has found.

Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary estimates the force is failing to record more than 17,400 reported crimes each year.

The policing regulator rated the force as “inadequate” on the issue.

HM Inspector of Constabulary Wendy Williams said: “I was most concerned to find that the force had failed to record reports of rape, serious sexual assault and offences of serious assault and human trafficking.”

The force said they put victims at the heart of their work, and most of the criticisms concerned updating records and administration.”

Source: BBC Devon Live website

Here is the PCC’s catch-all spin response which shows that her former job in PR is one to which she could readily return:

http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/police-commissioner-alison-hernandez-says-police-must-improve-in-row-over-crime-reporting/story-30123712-detail/story.html

A council “Communications Officer” (press officer) tells the truth about his soul-destroying job

I can’t face watching I, Daniel Blake because every day I feel complicit in a system that denigrates vulnerable people.

I knew leaving the voluntary sector to go and work for a local authority would require a culture shift, but I did not fully comprehend how difficult it would be to put a positive spin on cuts to local services after years spent promoting social justice campaigns.

I am part of a team which creates and distributes communications to the general public, through newsletters, the council website, on social media and through the local media. Working in communications often means putting aside your personal opinions and values for the good of the organisation paying your salary, and I have a lot of sympathy with local authorities now I’ve seen it from the inside.

I field calls for stretched council services – and soon my job may be cut too.

With brutal funding cuts from central government and the growing pressure on services, many councils are trying to make the best of a bad situation and make budgets stretch, regardless of politics.

But when Ken Loach’s ‘I, Daniel Blake’ was released last year, all my friends went to watch it in the cinema. I could not face going with them, knowing I was complicit in the same system the film portrayed as destroying people’s lives.

I can see the red tape responsible for the denigration of vulnerable people around me every day, and to be responsible for dressing up the effects of needless bureaucracy in a pretty package for our local papers is soul-destroying. Our press releases go through rigorous rounds of sign off, through all sorts of departments, senior council officers and councillors, all of whom want to remove any material that could incur criticism, which results in bland, council-speak copy.

People probably wouldn’t expect a press officer to care about local reporters, especially as they are usually asking us for responses to critical stories about the council, but I have real sympathy with them. Most of them are inexperienced and clearly stretched for time and resources: their copy is riddled with factual errors that could easily have been double checked, resulting in fractious phone calls between our side and theirs.

The vulnerable people I became a councillor to help have no idea I’m here. The reality is most residents don’t have the time or inclination to attend committee meetings or read all the reports and documents produced by the council. They should know how funding cuts are going to affect their local services and communities. It’s all there in black and white if you know where to find it. It’s an easier time for us if contentious issues pass through committees easily, as there are fewer difficult questions from reporters for the week’s papers.

Social media has become another accountability function for councils, which creates a lot more noise for us to deal with. Most councils will have active citizen campaigners ready to jump on any communication the council puts out to rip it to shreds. These days, it’s actually these people, rather than journalists, who spot the things the council would prefer went unquestioned. It can be disheartening, particularly when you’ve worked hard to capture the nuance of a complicated situation, but when you agree with the critics over the council it’s hard to take it too personally.”

https://www.theguardian.com/public-leaders-network/2017/feb/04/media-press-officer-council-cuts-local-papers-daniel-blake

How long is a piece of NHS Property Services string?

New owners of Sidmouth Victoria Hospital under fire for ‘incomprehensible’ answer to rent question.

NHS Property Services (NHSPS) took over 12 East Devon community hospitals on December 1, 2016 – prompting fears from some trustees and representatives over the future of the facilities under a commercially-operated company.

Speaking at a recent Devon County Council (DCC) health and wellbeing scrutiny meeting, Councillor Claire Wright called for NHSPS bosses to be held to account and voiced her frustration at repeated failures to provide the authority with more information.

Cllr Wright asked the company to outline how much each community hospital is being charged in rent, but NHSPS says it is unable to disclose the figures as they remain in commercial confidence while lease negotiations are being concluded.

Cllr Wright said: “I asked for the information in June and I asked again and they said they would get the information and they did not. The answer they have given is incomprehensible.

“A very strong message needs to go back that we have now been waiting seven months for an answer to a very straightforward question and we would appreciate it if they would come to the next meeting because they now own 12 community hospitals across East Devon.”

NHSPS is responsible for managing 3,500 NHS buildings and ploughs any profits back into the health services – selling on property it considers no longer necessary.

Cllr Wright argued it cannot ‘pick and choose’ and, if it is – as claimed – a part of the NHS family, should be held accountable.

Sidmouth fundraisers have vowed to safeguard the future of the town’s hospital, which has undergone a £5million refurbishment paid for entirely by community contributions.

Vice president of the Sidmouth Victoria Hospital Comforts Fund, Frances Newth, said it has received assurance from NHSPS that there should be no noteable changes under the new ownership. She added that trustees have emphasised the amount of community support received in the town and the importance of maintaining it.

Responding to a question from DCC about the amount of rental income compared to figures spent on maintenance, NHSPS revealed its budgeted rental income for 2016/17 is £408 million nationally.

The amount set out for routine, small-scale maintenance in this period is £98 million – which does not include overheads such as salaries of teams carrying out the work – and an additional £60 million is forecasted for larger maintenance projects.

A spokesman for NHSPS said: “The information sent to the council this month was provided further to attending two committee sessions in 2016, where members had the opportunity to question company representatives in person.

“We have provided supporting written information on two other occasions, as requested by the council.”

http://www.sidmouthherald.co.uk/news/new_owners_of_sidmouth_victoria_hospital_under_fire_for_incomprehensible_answer_to_rent_question_1_4874530

Is Trump using the Local Enterprise Partnership model?

This is spookily like the way our Local Enterprise Partnerships (and before that, the East Devon Business Forum) were created – with business people in the driving seat and councils as passengers without seatbelts!

“President Donald Trump met with a roomful of top CEOs at the White House – and says he tried to install other titans of industry on his executive council only to have them nixed as ‘corporate raiders.’

Trump met with a group that included Jamie Dimon of JP Morgan, BlackRock CEO Laurence Fink, retired GE CEO Jack Welch – whom he called ‘legendary’ – and other business bigs.

As if that weren’t enough financial firepower, Trump said that he tried to get other financial bigs onto the panel, which meets about once a month to advise him the economy, taxes, and regulations.

‘So many people have called – friends of mine in big business,’ Trump said, ‘and that wanted to be on the committee.’

Billionaire Stephen Schwartzman of Blackstone private equity firm, who serves on the council, acted as gatekeeper. “I said, ‘Steve, can we get so and so?’ Trump said, with the CEOs gathered around him.

‘Nope,’ Schwartzman replied. ‘What do you mean no, it’s big business, massive business,’ Trump pleaded, in his telling.

‘How about this one?’ Trump would ask.

‘He’s a corporate raider, these people don’t want to be sitting with corporate raiders,’ was Schwartzman’s reply.

‘He’s been very very selective,’ Trump said, adding: ‘We’ll be putting a couple more on this.’

Introducing the group, Trump hailed BlackRock investment company CEO Larry Fink for having boosted his personal bottom line through investments.

Trump displayed no reservations about asking some of the world’s most influential bankers about their preferences for peeling back bank regulations enacted after the financial crisis.

‘We have some of the bankers here. There’s nobody to tell me better about Dodd-Frank than Jamie, so you’re going to tell me about it, but we expect to be cutting a lot out of Dodd-Frank.

The White House billed the event as a strategy and policy forum.
The group’s official title is the President’s Strategic and Policy Forum. It has 16 members.

Absent from the event was Uber chief executive Travis Kalanick, who announced just hours before that he had quit, following pressure from consumers over Trump’s new immigration order.

Trump didn’t mention Kalanick during his public comments.

The Uber boss quit the council, even as the company is facing blowback for its decision to drop its congestion pricing during a taxi boycott meant to oppose the immigration order.

He made his decision known in an email to employees, where he argued against Trump’s new immigration ban.

‘Earlier today I spoke briefly with the president about the immigration executive order and its issues for our community,’ Kalanick wrote. ‘I also let him know that I would not be able to participate on his economic council. Joining the group was not meant to be an endorsement of the president or his agenda but unfortunately it has been misinterpreted to be exactly that,’ he added.

Trump hailed another attendee, his Commerce Secretary nominee, billionaire Wilbur Ross.

‘When I campaigned for office I promised the American people that I’d ask for our country’s best and brightest, and we have that. Wilbur is representing us,’ Trump said.

Trump said of close confidante and business magnate Carl Icahn, ‘Carl Icahn called up and he goes, ‘I heard you got Wilbur. Everybody calls him Wilbur. I’ve never heard him called – we just know him as Wilbur, right?”

Trump met the business honchos as he prepared to sign executive actions asking the Treasury and the Labor Departments to examine reforms to roll back regulations intended to make markets safer and protect consumers.
The actions would examine the ‘Volcker Rule,’ meant to curb speculation, AFP reported.

‘(We) believe that Dodd-Frank in many respects was a piece of massive government overreach,’ a senior administration official told the outlet. ‘It imposed hundreds of new regulations on financial institutions, it established an enormous amount of work and effort for financial firms.'”

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4188962/Trump-meets-CEOs-says-ll-slash-bank-regs.html

Exmouth Visitor Survey

Last year nearly 5000 people in Exmouth voted in favour of further “INDEPENDENT consultation before any further action (including submission of planning applications) was taken on The Queen’s Drive.

While this has been roundly ignored by EDDC. they did at least seek the opinion of visitors. When independent Cllr Megan Armstrong carried out the Seafront Survey with support from SES we found visitors hold similar values around the seafront as residents, and that it was Exmouth’s unique charm that kept them coming back. Alarmingly many said they would no longer visit Exmouth if The Queen’s Drive development went ahead. I would have thought EDDC would be concerned about this yet it is just another piece of evidence that has been ignored.

Here is the EDDC website announcing the visitor survey, note the last paragraph states the results will be reported to ‘the team’ (Coastal Communities) at the end of the year (2016) …”

https://saveexmouthseafront.wordpress.com/2017/01/29/exmouth-visitors-survey-an-update-of-sorts/

Save Our Sidmouth press release on PegasusLife contract

PRESS STATEMENT

EA/2016/0279-0280 East Devon District Council v Information Commissioner

It is well over a year since Freedom of Information requests were made to have key EDDC documents published – the contract with developer Pegasus to buy the Knowle site and the agent’s report on the bidding process and sale.

EDDC refused to publish these, even after being told to by the Information Commissioner. But, now that the case has gone to Tribunal, it has decided to release the documents.

But why now?

What is very clear is that the release of the contract and agent’s report is happening only now that Pegasus’ planning application for Knowle has been considered.

As the EDDC press release makes clear: “With the PegasusLife planning application having been refused, it is considered that this sensitivity has now been reduced and that publication of the information is acceptable.”

And this is very much the point.

Not only was the leadership at EDDC keeping this ‘sensitive’ information from the public – it did not want its own Councillors to know what was in the contract and the bidding process. What is particularly alarming is that the leadership at EDDC hid these details from the planning committee (the DMC) before it made its decision over Knowle.

Looking at the details, the documents reveal the following:

> The agent warned that the development might be perceived by the planning committee as ‘over development’. As they said: “If this is the case, then the application may lead to refusal, delay or in the worst case prevent the relocation of the Council’s offices.”

> The agent also said that “Pegasus is not making any allowance for affordable housing or 106 contributions, as they are classing it as C2”. In other words, the plans were always about classifying the development as C2 (a care home) and not C3, which would mean paying for affordable housing.

> Finally, Pegasus were not prepared to offer significant ‘overage’ – meaning that EDDC would not be able to ‘claw back’ any excess profits Pegasus might make.

But what is particularly disturbing is what these documents reveal about how EDDC operates:

> From the outset, Planning Officers challenged the C2 designation and the scale of development and clearly wanted to give the site C3 status – but later they changed their mind and recommended approval of the Pegasus plans.

> In which case, the DMC have been totally vindicated in their decision to reject the planning application. But we only know this now that the contract and bidding process have been revealed.

> Had the Full Council been aware of the terms of the deal with Pegasus – for example, no significant overage – then then their approval of Pegasus as the ‘preferred developer’ might not have been forthcoming.

> The Information Commissioner insisted that EDDC reveal the contract and negotiations to the public. But what is particularly reprehensible is that the leadership at EDDC refused to reveal these crucial details to their own Councillors.

We now have to ask how the Council will respond – in particular, whether they will want some answers as to how the whole process was mismanaged.

And we have to ask why once again the leadership at EDDC continue to be so secretive in their dealings over the Knowle relocation project – and whether they are going to act on their promise to be truly open and transparent – with both the public and their own Councillors.”

http://futuresforumvgs.blogspot.co.uk/2017/01/knowle-relocation-project-full-pegasus_26.html

Lib Dems object to Local Enterprise Partnership CEO 26% payrise but there is nothing they or we can do about it

“The row over a £24,000 pay rise for the boss of a publicly funded enterprise partnership has deepened, with opposition councillors calling for Devon County Council to quit the body “until common sense prevails”.

It comes after the board of the Heart of the South West Local Enterprise Partnership approved a 26 per cent pay rise for its chief executive on Tuesday, January 17.

It means Chris Garcia, who is employed through Somerset County Council, will earn £115,000 a year for his role helping to promote economic growth in Devon and Somerset.

Unison’s Devon County branch secretary, Steve Ryles, branded the pay rise “absolutely disgraceful” at a time when pay increases for council workers have been capped at one per cent.

Now Devon’s Liberal Democrat councillors have submitted a motion calling on the county council to use whatever means it can to stop the pay rise being implemented.

Cllr Alan Connett, shadow leader of the council, said: “At a time of ever tightening pressure on the public purse and yet more cuts in council services in the region, it is our view that the 26 per cent pay rise sends the wrong message to people when they face rising council tax bills and, for some, cuts in council tax benefit schemes which help the poorest.

“As a matter of genuine urgency, the board of the Local Enterprise Partnership should reconsider the pay rise it has awarded.”

The motion, proposed by Councillor Connett and seconded by Councillor Brian Greenslade, states: “At a time of huge reductions in Government funding for local councils forcing cuts in health, education, care for older people and children, Devon County Council is offended by the reported 26 per cent pay rise for the chief executive of the Heart of the South West Local Enterprise Partnership.

“We call upon the council to take urgent steps to stop the annual pay rise of £24,271 and if it cannot do that, to withdraw from membership of the partnership until common sense prevails with regard to top management pay increases.”

Businesses, universities and local authorities are represented on the LEP board, including East Devon District Council and Devon County Council.

Asked how the proposal came about, the spokeswoman said: “The recommendation was made jointly by the chairs of the LEP board and of the LEP Finance & Resources Committee, in the interests of enabling the LEP to continue its momentum of success towards delivering its strategic economic plan.”

The LEP is chaired by Steve Hindley, chairman of Exeter-based construction firm Midas Group.

Before Tuesday’s board meeting in Tiverton, Devon County Council leader John Hart said: “As a local authority subject to significant government cuts, I cannot support a pay rise of 25 per cent for any high-level official.

“It is clear the CEO does a good job and the LEP has brought many millions of pounds into the Devon economy. But there has to be recognition of the tight financial times in which we live.”

A county council spokesman said on Wednesday the authority would be making no further comment on the matter.

The motion will be considered at the council’s budget and council tax setting meeting on Thursday, February 16.”

A spokeswoman for the LEP said it would not be releasing a breakdown of how board members voted on the CEO’s pay

http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/lib-dems-condemn-24-000-pay-rise-for-devon-and-somerset-enterprise-chief/story-30069142-detail/story.html

That 26% payrise for LEP CEO

“The LEP did not say who had voted for the increase, but the WMN understands that all but one council representative had opposed the rise.”

Read more at http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/lep-boss-gets-26-pay-rise/story-30068619-detail/story.html

We know that councillors from Devon County Council and Somerset County Council were against the payrise.

Assuming that the DCC and SCC representatives voted against, that leaves Paul Diviani (EDDC), Gordon Oliver (Torquay) and Ian Bowyer (Plymouth).

Which one voted for it. We will never know, because we are not allowed to know. It wasn’t even designated on the agenda:

Click to access LEP-Board-Agenda-17-Jan-2017-V-5-1.pdf

or in the minutes:

Click to access LEP-Board-Agenda-17-Jan-2017-V-5-1.pdf

You want to see Board papers (as you would for council meetings) well, take a look here:

http://heartofswlep.co.uk/about-the-lep/lep-board/board-documents/

You want to know what they spend? This is the information they direct you to here:
http://www.somerset.gov.uk/EasysiteWeb/getresource.axd?AssetID=120103&type=full&servicetype=Attachment

Good luck!

This is what happens when you get an elected Mayor

“TORBAY mayor Gordon Oliver has pledged to continue funding a £40,000-a-year ‘American office’ despite the fact it has failed to attract any investment to the Bay.

As other vital budgets are being cut, councillors branded the £120,000 already spent as ‘a waste of money’.

Mayor Oliver said he wanted to re-establish the American office in the light of Donald Trump’s recent election victory.

The aim of the ‘our man in America’ initiative, launched by Torbay Council and Torbay Development Agency was to encourage ‘Silicon Valley’-style businesses in the US to consider Torbay both for trade connections and as an ideal location for a foothold in the European market. But at the recent Torbay Council policy group meeting — where scrutiny members made recommendations on the mayor’s proposed budget — there were calls not to repeat the £40,000-a-year funding.

And it was revealed the American office has so far failed to attract any funding.

The contract for the USA lead generation has now expired and members said it should not be renewed. Cllr Chris Lewis, scrutiny board chairman, said while they did not want the budget for the ‘vital’ work done by Torbay Development Agency on economic regeneration reduced, it should still look to make savings.

But at the Torbay Business Forum business breakfast, mayor Oliver said he hoped to re-establish an office in the United States, particularly in the light of Donald Trump’s election as president.

“I am hoping the TDA and the council will support it though some of my colleagues are not very supportive. “But I had a letter from the Prime Minister saying she supports my bid to have a link with the United States as it is so important for the future of the national economy and for here as well.”

A council spokesman said: “Torbay Council does not have and has never been in possession of an American office. A contract was procured by the TDA on behalf of Torbay Council with the England Development Agency to generate leads for new direct investment from North American businesses.

“However, this contract expired in July this year and hasn’t been extended or re-procured.”

http://www.exeterexpressandecho.co.uk/council-will-keep-funding-40-000-a-year-man-in-america-despite-zero-investment-in-four-years/story-30067568-detail/story.html

“Creative group” or “group of creatives” – what’s the difference!

Recall that Councillor Skinner has said that he has never met “The Ecmouth Creative Group”, then read this Freedom of Information response:

“Thank you for your request for information. Please find the response to your query below.

What criteria does the Exmouth Regeneration Board (ERB) use when selecting potential community groups to communicate with?
The ERB does not formally communicate with community groups and does not therefore apply any specific criteria. The notes of ERB meetings are published and the various members of the ERB including both District and Town Councils communicate with a wide range of Exmouth community groups as required.

[BUT THIS IS CONTRADICTED FURTHER IN THIS RESPONSE!]

Why was the Exmouth Creative Group assigned a brief to design a vision for Exmouth?
Cllr Skinner met in December with some Exmouth local businesses in his capacity as Chair of the Exmouth Regeneration Board and Portfolio Holder for Economy. It was an informal meeting to talk about Exmouth matters and to share views with a group of local businesses who would describe themselves as ‘creative’.

When was the decision made to as the Exmouth Creative Group to design a vision for Exmouth, who was involved in making this decision and whose idea was it in the first instance?
This decision was not taken by the ERB or by any representative of EDDC and no information is held in relation to this question.

How did EDDC and the Exmouth Regeneration Board in particular approach the Exmouth Community Group and who did this?
As above, Cllr Skinner met with some local businesses.

Given that the Exmouth Creative Group is unknown within Exmouth, please explain why the many well known community groups have been overlooked in favour of the Exmouth Creative Group for this task?
The Council engages with all manner of local groups in Exmouth and elsewhere in a variety of ways.

Please provide the names of those in attendance and dates of any meetings between any officers or councillors of EDDC with the Exmouth Creative Group or any representative of the Exmouth Creative Group.
The meeting was an informal one and the Council does not have an attendance list.

I hope this information is helpful but if you feel dissatisfied with the way we have responded, please contact our Monitoring Officer, Henry Gordon Lennox, to request an internal review at [email address]

You may also approach the Information Commissioner for advice at http://www.ico.org.uk”

https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/east_devon_district_council_and?nocache=incoming-922717#incoming-922717

Dirty lobbying

We do it the other way around in East Devon – we gave a senior officer to a lobbying group viz former EDDC Economic Development Officer Nigel Harrison who was offered up as Secretary to the East Devon Business Forum (a group of local developers under the Chairmanship of disgraced ex-Tory councillor Graham Brown) AND EDDC paid all its expenses!

“Whitehall’s lobbying tsar has launched an inquiry into concerns that informal parliamentary groups set up by MPs and peers are being used to bypass lobbying rules.

Alison White, the registrar of consultant lobbyists, has interviewed officials from all-party parliamentary groups (APPGs) after receiving reports that lobbyists are acting as secretaries to gain access to legislators.

The inquiry comes after a growth in the number of APPGs, which are allowed use of the Palace of Westminster’s catering facilities and can invite senior ministers and civil servants for meetings with donors.

There are more than 550 APPGs, which exist to help MPs and peers discuss major issues of the day, according to the parliamentary register. The groups have received more than £5.4m in external funding since the beginning of 2015. …

…Private firms and individuals can sponsor APPGs to help pay for “secretariat services”, trips abroad or reports. Any APPG is allowed to include a secretariat from an outside body, and it is this position that can be easily abused, according to White.

There are more than 200 people or organisations listed as secretariats for APPGs who are not registered on the register of consultant lobbyists, which requires that meetings with ministers or permanent secretaries be disclosed. White believes some APPG secretariats may be breaking this rule. White is planning to issue advice to all organisations that offer specialist services to APPGs later this month.” …

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jan/06/lobbying-inquiry-registrar-parliamentary-secretaries

Hinkley C: possible £2 billion hit on British taxpayers played down

“Taxpayers still face a possible £2billion bill for building a nuclear power plant at Hinkley Point despite a minister’s claim they were ‘fully insulated’ from the cost.

The Government is underwriting loans to the builders of the plant, which is a joint project with France and China.

This is despite Business Secretary Greg Clark telling MPs in September that after Prime Minister Theresa May paused the project, taxpayers were now protected.

Despite the remarks, the £2billion guarantee – which would kick in if the companies involved in the project collapse – are still counted as a ‘contingent liability’ on the Government’s accounts.

Shadow minister Barry Gardiner told The Times he had been misled by Mr Clark’s response. …

… After work resumed, Mr Clark told MPs: ‘EDF has confirmed to me that it will not be taking up that £2 billion guarantee, so the taxpayer is fully insulated from the costs of construction.’

EDF confirmed by letter it did not ‘anticipate’ calling on the guarantee.
But in October, in a written statement to both MPs and peers, ministers said: ‘The government is confirming that it has approved the provision of a guarantee for up to £2billion to the project for the construction of its new EPR nuclear plant in Somerset, backed by commitments from the shareholders.’

They added: ‘The guarantee will be available from 2018 to 2020 if necessary conditions are met and is at government’s discretion.

‘Even if made available, and EDF have indicated to the secretary of state for the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy that it is not their current intention to take up the guarantee, I judge the likelihood of any call under the guarantee to be very low.’

After the memo came to light yesterday, Mr Gardiner said: ‘The assurance that Greg Clark gave me was categoric: EDF were not taking up the guarantee.
‘Whilst I took him at his word, it appears that the Treasury were aware the secretary of state was suffering from baroque speech.

‘That is why the guarantee is still marked as a liability on their books.'”

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4090908/Taxpayers-left-2bn-bill-new-Hinkley-Point-nuclear-plant-despite-promises-ministers-insulated-cost.html

Could this sort of protest persuade our Tory MPs to back the NHS?

Conspiracy theorists and fake news enthusiasts are already saying that this was organised to make Trump look good – hhhm! And can we see parallels here – nationally and locally?

“WASHINGTON ―

After a torrent of bad headlines, countless phone calls to member offices, and two tweets from President-elect Donald Trump, House Republicans dropped their plans to gut the Office of Congressional Ethics Tuesday, just minutes before the House was set to gavel in for the 115th Congress and adopt their rules package for the next two years.

The amendment ― authored by Judiciary Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) ― would have placed the independent congressional ethics office under the oversight of the House Ethics Committee, changed the OCE’s name and barred the office from releasing reports to the public. In effect, it would have neutered Congress’ most aggressive watchdog.

The decision to strip the Goodlatte amendment came just before noon on Tuesday as Republicans planned to begin the 115th Congress. Earlier in the day, responding to numerous news reports about Republicans gutting the OCE, Trump asked in a tweet whether Republicans really had to make the “weakening” of the ethics office their first order of business, though he also didn’t necessarily come out against the idea of eventually overhauling the OCE.

Ethics groups were quick to criticize House Republicans for the effort. A coalition of groups including the Campaign for Accountability, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington and the League of Women Voters sent a letter to House Speaker Paul Ryan (R-Wis.) and House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) on Tuesday calling for the reauthorization of the OCE.

Several other groups, including the conservative Judicial Watch, called the move “shameful.” The nonpartisan group Common Cause even pointed out that exactly 11 years ago, lobbyist Jack Abramoff ― whose crimes helped lead to the creation of the OCE ― pleaded guilty to charges including fraud conspiracy and tax evasion. (Abramoff told Politico Tuesday that Republican’s efforts to gut the ethics watchdog are “exactly the opposite of what Congress should be doing.”)

Members reported that they had started getting a flood of phone calls from constituents concerned that Congress was neutering a key ethics watchdog.

“The calls we’ve gotten in my district office and here in Washington has surprised me, meaning the number of calls,” said Rep. Walter Jones (R-N.C.), who noted before the amendment was stripped that he would vote against the rules package if it remained in the measure. “People are just sick and tired.”

Some Republicans, including South Carolina Reps. Trey Gowdy and Mark Sanford, were reporting Tuesday that they would vote against the typically party-line rules package.

Facing public pressure and an internal mutiny, GOP leadership called a special meeting and told Republicans they needed to strip the OCE amendment.

Leaders told members they would instead work with Democrats to come up with a proposal to reform the OCE before the August recess, though a number of Republicans were unsatisfied by the promise.

Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) said he would now work to completely abolish the Office of Congressional Ethics, citing concerns over anonymous whistleblowers making accusations against members and the OCE leaking information to the press.

Asked to provide an example of the OCE leaking information to the press, King failed to come up with one and got testy.

“Just google it,” he said.

Pelosi issued a statement after the amendment was dropped, noting the “clear contempt for ethics in the People’s House” that she said Republicans showed with their plan.

“Once again, the American people have seen the toxic dysfunction of a Republican House that will do anything to further their special interest agenda, thwart transparency and undermine the public trust,” she added. “Republicans should remember the strength of public outrage they faced in the space of 12 hours as they scheme to do lasting damage to the health and economic security of millions and millions of hard-working families.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/house-republicans-ethics_us_586bdb14e4b0de3a08f99e66?

Hernandez thinks ” negative press” on election expenses allegations were good for her!

When does spin become bovine excrement? AND she says she is “not nationally media trained” yet was employed as a campaign manager for the Tories!

” … Back in October last year, when Ms Hernandez had not been contacted by West Mercia Police regarding the investigation, she spoke about the impact the negative press has had on her.

“This negative publicity has been a very helpful process because it’s made me approachable, it means that people will ask for help,” she said at the time. “It’s got to the point actually where I’m not seeing it as a bad thing.

“When I’ve gone out in the public domain I’ve had a lot of people come and say I feel sorry for you, and I’ve never felt more loved in my life.

“It was like a baptism of fire. I’m not nationally media trained, I don’t want people to think I’m shying away from them.”

http://www.plymouthherald.co.uk/crime-chief-interviewed-by-police-investigating-election-expenses-allegations/story-30027908-detail/story.html

“Company boss who gave £930,000 to Tory party receives knighthood”

Owl wonders if it wins Euromillions it might be able to call itself “Croney Owl”? Hugo’s croney knighthood from old pal and Eton schoolfriend David Cameron is looking grubbier and grubbier.

“David Ord, who becomes a knight in the new year, is a co-owner of Bristol ports and a member of the Conservative party’s Leaders’ Group, who were granted exclusive access to cabinet ministers under David Cameron and George Osborne. He has given more than £930,000 to the party since 2013.

Ord, a major opponent of the Severn Barrage, was once embroiled in a donations row after it emerged in 2014 that Bristol North West MP Charlotte Leslie had failed to declare the port owner’s donations to her local party on time, despite making numerous parliamentary interventions about the project. She apologised and was cleared of wrongdoing by the parliamentary watchdog.

Jeremy Corbyn said the honours for Tory donors were an insult to those who had been rewarded for charitable work or achievements. “The Conservatives are making a mockery of our honours system,” the Labour leader’s spokesperson said. “Every crony appointment is an insult to the incredible people from right across Britain who are rewarded for the great contributions they make to our national life”.

A Downing Street source defended the honours for Conservative donors, saying: “Being involved in political parties is generally considered to be an important part of civic society, and the alternative is having state funding for political parties, which is not where the consensus lies. When people dedicate their time and service to civil society it’s appropriate they can be honoured.” …

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2016/dec/30/company-boss-david-ord-tory-donor-receives-knighthood

Bay FM interview: Skinner (EDDC) v MacAllister (SES)

Louise MacAllister, Spokesperson, Save Exmouth Seafront gives her view on the contest. Owl will be happy to publish Councillor Skinner’s riposte if received:

  • SES’s core aim is for independent public consultation before any further work goes ahead on the seafront.
  • EDDC’s consultations have been inadequate.
  • Cllr Megan Armstrong’s survey that SES supported showed that a majority do not want to see wholesale development on the seafront.
  • EDDC’s incompetence around the project has led to the seafront becoming derelict.
  • The spiralling costs of the project further demonstrate the incompetence of the Exmouth Regeneration Board.
  • That the Regeneration Board meet in secret only increases frustration and as such Ms MacAllister has been trying to arrange a Q&A session with Cllr Skinner, the chair of the Exmouth Regeneration Board.
  • Cllr Skinner gatecrashed a SES meeting, this is not public engagement.

Cllr Skinner, Chair, Exmouth Regeneration Board:

  • It is a three-phase development, it’s very exciting, we should be excited!
  • Phase three is ‘open for consultation’ we may even have a hotel?!
  • Existing tenants are blamed for delays.
  • It is REALLY, REALLY EXCITING!
  • Skinner thinks they have consulted extensively but – he doesn’t know the numbers.
  • This is a SERIOUS investment (thank god it’s not a joke investment!).
  • Correction – the ‘recent consultation’ with over 1000 participants that Howard Witts mentioned is in fact the seafront survey undertaken by independent Cllr Megan Armstrong, and which the regeneration board have resolutely ignored.
  • [Seems Skinner finds it amusing that the regeneration board meets in secret as he can be heard laughing while Howard is asking him about this].
  • The Premier Inn and Ocean are apparently architecturally superior and successful, ‘raising the bar in architecture’.

Other points:

  • Everything Skinner claims about his gatecrashing of an SES meeting is untrue, he was unwelcome and people made it clear he was unwelcome. Unfortunately the meeting was not chaired well and so he was enabled to carry on despite this. He was certainly not thanked or clapped as he claims in the interview.
  • The post-march SES meeting was not an open public meeting nor was it advertised as such, it was advertised as a meeting for SES supporters.
  • Cllr Skinner does not think it is Ms MacAllister’s responsibility as SES spokesperson to say that he should hold an open public meeting. SHE AGREES! It is HIS responsibility and he alone should be held accountable for his lack of public engagement she says. As someone who represents a group seeking transparency and openness she will continue to press for this even though it is not her responsibility.

Listen to Louise MacAllister

Listen to Cllr Skinner’s Response

“Toshiba seeks financial help with £8bn UK nuclear project” – a knock-on for EDF/Hinkley C?

Our Heart of the South West Local Enterprise Partnership has put almost all OUR eggs into its nuclear egg basket. Not surprising when several of its board members have direct or indirect nuclear interests.

“Toshiba, the technology company at the centre of plans to build more nuclear reactors in Britain, is looking for outside help to fund its £8bn programme after a collapse in its share price.

The Japanese group is in talks with local financial institutions to support the construction of an atomic plant near the Sellafield facility in Cumbria, after running up losses following an accounting scandal.

The emergence of Toshiba’s problems will add to worries over Britain’s nuclear plans after the French energy group EDF, which plans to build the Hinkley Point C station in Somerset, dropped out of France’s CAC 40 index of leading shares.

There is widening concern in the City about the escalating costs of huge nuclear projects, which are damaging company share valuations and undermining the government’s commitment to new nuclear at a time when it has promised to phase out coal-fired power stations.

“It has become difficult for Toshiba to do this (fund the NuGen programme in the north-west of England) on its own,” one source told Reuters, which reported that Toshiba had hired HSBC bank to help find new funds.

On Monday, the Japanese financial regulator recommended that Toshiba be fined 7.37bn yen (£40m) for overstating profits and the share price of the company is down 40% since the start of the year.

Toshiba is a 60% shareholder in the NuGen project to build 3.4 gigawatts (GW) of electricity generating capacity close to the Sellafield plant, where spent fuel is reprocessed.

Neither Toshiba nor NuGen, a partnership with Engie (formerly GDF Suez) of France, was available for comment. The cost of building three reactors designed by a Toshiba subsidiary, Westinghouse, was estimated two years ago at £8bn but experts believe that figure could have at least doubled. That is in line with the price tag for Hinkley, which EDF puts at £18bn.

The 3.2GW Somerset reactors, to be built by EDF with the help of Chinese state companies, have been given the go-ahead by the UK government but the project is awaiting the final investment decision from France.

This week EDF blamed the 85% holding by the French state and lack of free float shares for its removal from the CAC index. But many analysts in the City of London have released gloomy equity forecasts on EDF, fearing Hinkley might go over budget like the company’s Flamanville reactor project in Normandy.”

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2015/dec/10/toshiba-seeks-financial-help-with-8bn-uk-nuclear-project

Nuclear watchdog to be investigated by – watchdog!

“Nuclear safety watchdog under review after series of accidents

Whitehall is investigating the nuclear regulator after The Times revealed that several serious accidents had been dismissed as posing no safety risk.
The Office for Nuclear Regulation (ONR) has come under fire from experts who argue it is too close to the industry to police it rigorously.

Yesterday an investigation disclosed that the inadvertent discharge of a torpedo at a nuclear submarine docks in Plymouth, a complete power cut at the country’s nuclear weapons base and the contamination of at least 15 workers with radioactive material were among the events it had said were of no concern.

Officials at the Department for Work and Pensions, which is responsible for the ONR, are understood to be looking into whether the regulator is doing enough to keep the country’s reactors, nuclear processing sites and military bases safe.

Although the number of publicly acknowledged accidents has been stable for more than a decade, the rate of incidents judged to be “of no nuclear safety significance” has crept up to more than one a day over the last five years.

Between 2012 and 2015 these included three road accidents involving nuclear material, a dozen leaks and at least 30 fires as well as 70 anomalies on the Atomic Weapons Establishment site at Aldermaston near Reading.

The ONR has said that all of its safety classifications followed international guidelines and insisted that it remained a robust and independent regulator.

Nuclear experts, however, called on the government to launch a review. Stephen Thomas, emeritus professor of energy policy at the University of Greenwich, said the news had reinforced his suspicions that “the first priority for the ONR is not to frighten the horses”.

He said the body had previously ignored warnings about the safety of extending the lifespan of the AGR, an old reactor design that is still in use at seven sites in the UK, as well as the reliability of the newer EPR model, the latest version of which is due to be installed at Hinkley Point C.

“Ironically, since they became an independent body rather than being part of the Health and Safety Executive [in 2014], they seem to have got worse,” Professor Thomas said. “Independence is just a cheap and easy way for government to wash its hands of its rightful responsibility.

“Independent regulators must be accountable to the public and if it is not through a democratically elected government, who is it through?”

Earlier this year the ONR appointed as its chief executive a career civil servant with no background in nuclear engineering. David Toke, reader in energy politics at the University of Aberdeen and a member of the Nuclear Consulting Group, said this suggested that nuclear safety issues were a “low priority” for the organisation.

“Of course there should be more attention to this issue and a discussion about whether the de facto slide towards less nuclear safety in the UK is a good one,” he said.”

© Times Newspapers Limited 2016

East Devon Alliance: EDDC relocation “at any cost”

“East Devon District Council (EDDC) is leaving Sidmouth for new premises in Honiton and a renovated Exmouth Town Hall.

The latter is now vacant, but it will need work including a new boiler, rewiring and the removal of asbestos – renovations now estimated at £1,669,000, up from £1million in March 2015. [Mostly caused by EDDC doing their estimates and announcing projected estimated costs before commissioning a full structural survey which revealed nuerous expensive essential upgrades such as wiring, heating and insulation]

EDDC cabinet members last week agreed to accelerate the refurbishment so some key staff can relocate as early as November 2017.

Councillor Cathy Gardner told the Herald: “This truly is relocation at any price, because council tax payers will pick up the bill.”

The cabinet meeting heard that a new planning application to redevelop EDDC’s current HQ Knowle could be six months away or more after it refused PegasusLife’s bid for a 113-home retirement community earlier this month. The developer is yet to reveal if it will appeal the decision but the £7.5million it offered was intended to help fund the authority’s £9.2million [at the last estimate] relocation project.

Cllr Gardner said the project was initially sold to councillors as ‘cost neutral’ but is now costing taxpayers ‘over £2million and counting’ and cash will have to be borrowed. [This does not take into account building new offices for the EDDC Estates Department at Sidmouth’s Manstone Depot]

She added: “Proceeding with the refurbishment of Exmouth Town Hall weakens the bargaining position of the council with any purchaser of the Knowle – they know that the council is desperate to secure a sale.

“The cabinet approved this extra cost for Exmouth Town Hall without seeing an up-to-date report on the budget for the project overall. They have approved an increase in ignorance of the total costs.”

An EDDC spokeswoman said: “The council remains committed to relocating the rest of its staff into fit-for-purpose offices as soon as possible, despite the recent planning application for Knowle being rejected. The current budget and income projections for the overall project – taking into account both Exmouth and Heathpark – remain balanced. The council has a continued and reasonable expectation that relocation from Knowle will show significant savings compared to remaining in Sidmouth.

“The financial case will be tested again, as it was in March 2015 when the council decided to relocate.”

The decision was ratified at a full council meeting on Wednesday.”

http://www.eastdevonalliance.org.uk/in-the-press/20161228/sidmouth-herald-claims-eddc-is-relocating-from-sidmouth-at-any-cost/

“‘Cameron’s Cronies’ backlash: Nominated peers could have to prove they have ‘record of significant achievement’ “

(Un)fortunately, this will not include Hugo Swire – Cameron’s Old Etonian contemporary and holiday companion – who was only given a knighthood. OK for impressing social climbers but offering no further political influence.

“Theresa May’s ethics adviser has suggested aides and party donors nominated for peerages should be forced to prove their suitability in the wake of the ‘Cameron’s Cronies’ scandal.

Lord Bew, chairman of the Committee on Standards in Public Life, told The Telegraph the idea of putting political appointments through rigorous interviews should be considered.

The crossbench peer said his committee was “very interested” in tighter safeguards to ensure that only those suitable to enter the House of Lords are picked.

However he warned that peers selected by the Prime Minister should not face identical criteria to those picked for the crossbench and said parties must be consulted on any change.

The reforms – which would amount to the biggest shake-up in the selection of peers for a generation – have been gaining traction in Parliament in recent weeks. …”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/12/27/camerons-cronies-backlash-nominated-peers-could-have-prove-have/