Category Archives: Sustainability

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

16 Jan 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Developers/ Development, Development Management Committee, Economy, EDDC, Skypark, Small and Medium businesses, Sustainability, Villages BUAB, Woodbury

EDDC councillor desperately tries to justify expansion of Greendale and Hill Barton – going against Village Built Up Area requirements

Owl says: what a lot of help Greendale and Hill Barton are getting from (some) EDDC councillors! Hurriedly arranged meetings, a desperate race to find loopholes to allow expansion and now this. Is it a personal comment? Well, an awful lot of “we” in there!!! And quoting 2012 consultant’s views in 2018 – astonishing! AND playing down their own industrial sites (too big for small businesses) – REALLY!

“Mike Allen comment to Inspector on Hill Barton and Greendale issues

(The Lead Councillor for Business and Employment in East Devon District Council (EDDC) and past Chair of the Local Plan Forum which developed the current EDDC Local Plan)

EDDC welcomes proposals for business investment and the creation of units for small and medium sized enterprises across the East Devon area subject to NPPF and Local Plan criteria.

We appreciate that cumulative development along the A3052 road corridor has the potential to negatively impact upon existing communities and infrastructure and the operations of existing businesses. The lack of objection from Highways England on a recent nearby planning application is significant Hill Barton (HB) and Greendale Business Park (GBP) are situated near recently approved (on appeal) Yeo Business Park. This determination is of direct material significance in considering further proposed development.

I will examine four main areas of consideration for Economic development in respect of this SPD for Business Parks:

1) It could be reasonably assumed that the Planning Inspector’s view that employment space proposals of a ‘relatively small-scale development that would provide jobs for local people’ would be applicable to the current plans for Business Parks in the area. It is similarly likely that this location would also be deemed a suitable location for small scale business units at appeal.

2) Greendale and Hill Barton Business Parks are larger scale and vitally important to the economic expansion of East Devon outside of the Science Park and Skypark areas.

3) The lack of residential neighbours means no loss of amenity.

4) There is clear demand for the facilities at Hill Barton and Greendale, without which business expansion would not be accommodated elsewhere. The medium quality, flexibility and appeal of the industrial storage space and units for larger growing businesses in the district is essential.

To be clear, we have no economic basis on which to challenge further development within the perimeters set in the Villages DPD.

5) EDDC’s Economic Development team have reviewed the Draft Villages Plan as well as the Sustainability Appraisal. Having also reviewed Strategy 27 and Policy E7 of the adopted Local Plan, in addition to material evidence in respect of employment land delivery below, I recommend that the Greendale (GD) and Hill Barton (HB) employment sites be removed from this Villages Development Plan.
Approval of this draft Villages DPD with GD and HB included will exacerbate the undersupply of employment premises we are already experiencing through non-delivery of our employment allocations in the adopted Local Plan.

The Council’s strategic drive is to prioritise the development of employment land in the west of the district. Any applicants are advised to examine the potential suitability of our Enterprise Zone sites (Inc. the Exeter Airport Business Park Expansion site; Cranbrook Town Centre; Skypark & Science Park), all of which benefit from infrastructure investment in excess of £25 million and include enhanced transport corridor infrastructure, rail stations and employment site infrastructure as well as being immediately adjacent to Exeter Airport and A30 and M5 junctions.

However, we are aware of some businesses feeding back a view that sites, such those examined above are aimed predominantly at the medium to large scale employers with scientific and professional or transport accommodation requirements in excess of 5,000 sq. ft. This can fail to meet the needs of many new and growing local medium sized manufacturing / B2 class businesses many of which would not be welcome in proximity to residential areas or on Science Parks.

In 2012 East Devon District Council Commissioned Professor Nigel Jump of Strategic Economics Ltd to carry out an independent assessment of the economic impact of the two strategic employment sites in East Devon. His conclusions were clear in that investment in these locations has unlocked valuable employment and economic growth in the district.

Moreover, these sites have the potential to make further economic net benefits (job creation, added GVA and inward investment) throughout challenging economic periods
to come. The report concludes that when social and environmental factors are considered, there remains a net positive impact of extended capacity at these sites which are yet to run their full course.

In light of this EDDC commissioned evidence, inclusion of Greendale and Hill Barton within the Villages DPD is unwarranted, contrary to the specialist advice we have commissioned and would cause demonstrable harm to the district.

These findings are echoed in 3 subsequent studies of demand for industrial and commercial space in East Devon which formed the overall economic element of the EDDC Local Plan which placed great weight on the sustainable balance of social, economic and environmental issues as the “Golden thread” which ran through the Local Plan and the NPPF

The proposals for the development of medium sized businesses of B2/B8 category fit well with a large number of B use premises enquires received by Economic Development in the last 2 years,

The filling out and redevelopment of Greendale and Hill Barton will complement the demand for larger B use provision and remain a welcome addition to the diverse mix of commercial accommodation required to facilitate indigenous business growth as well as the district’s ability to meet the needs of potential inward investors seeking to become established or grow their operations in East Devon.

Having recently reviewed B use premises demand across the district, the following updates can be cited: –

In Exmouth, B use accommodation at Liverton Business Park is in high demand. We have seen speculative build in this location with all but their final unit now let. They are unable to accommodate further demand

Across Clinton Devon Estate’s whole East Devon portfolio of commercial property; they have no other vacant B use premises available, representing a significant shortage of supply.

The Exeter and Heart of Devon Commercial Premises Register has received 43 separate enquiries for B1 Office accommodation in the District in the last 3 months

Greendale have received more than 80 B use premises enquiries in the last 12 months totalling more than 850,000 sq. ft.

Also, west of the Enterprise Zone, land is being brought forward for speculative development of small, flexible B use units.

Recently, as part of their Business Plan for the use of the Owen Building, Rolle Exmouth Ltd provided details of 59 separate businesses, social enterprises, individuals, groups/classes, education & training providers who have declared an interest in finding small SME commercial premises in Exmouth
Lastly, to curtail the provision of good jobs at Hill Barton and Greendale would be to consciously, selectively and actively undermine our stated (and adopted) Local Plan ambition of delivering one job per new dwelling. This target has not yet been realised, resulting in an unsustainable imbalance between the provision of new homes and new, quality jobs in East Devon.

We cannot continue to overlook this imbalance as our young teens and twenties leave to pursue careers elsewhere and the economically inactive grow as a proportion of our aging population.

We continue to receive inward investment enquires of differing scales and different employment use classes, including from the Dept. for International Trade (DIT, formerly UKTI).

These request a diverse mix of investment formats and much needed employment opportunities from outside the district. However, it is often difficult to identify suitable available employment premises.

Maintaining a diverse mix of development land and premises is key to securing these investments and associated local economic benefit.

The increased density of employment possible on Greendale and Hill Barton sites for B1/B2/B8 use is a clear benefit to our established local supply chains and producers/providers served by these developments.

Finally – I am concerned about an issue of prejudice: I believe that it would be prejudicial to the economic development of East Devon to consider the imposition of Strategy 7 (Greenfield) on Hill Barton on Greendale since the sites are clearly well used industrial sites which are in the right location for the type of businesses they serve.

The two sites have been afforded a specific exception in Policy E7 – ‘Extensions to
Existing Employment Sites’ of our adopted Local Plan (See Pg. 196 “This policy will not apply at Hill Barton and Greendale business Parks”). While for landscape and other reasons we might wish to limit the further expansion of the sites, I believe it would be prejudicial to single out these two sites rather than the 50 other smaller industrial sites for special treatment.

The criteria already laid down within the Local Plan are fully sufficient to control and promote the appropriate development on these sites.

Recommendation

I recommend that the Greendale (GBP) and Hill Barton (HB) employment sites be removed from this Villages Development Plan. I recommend that any application of strategy 7 within the perimeters already agreed should not occur but that other Planning Policies on Industrial Land development should be applied on the basis of equity and equality with other industrial sites in East Devon.

Approval of this draft Villages DPD with GD and HB included and subject to strategy 7 will exacerbate the undersupply of employment premises we are already experiencing through non-delivery of our employment allocations in the adopted Local Plan.”

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

10 Jan 2018

Posted under

Accountability, Clinton Devon Estates, Environment (local), Sustainability, Woodbury

Comments

1 Comment

Clinton Devon Estates blots its eco copybook at Blackhill Quarry

Will Woodbury ever be free of industrial onslaught?

A controversial Outline Planning Application has been submitted by Clinton Devon Estates for an Extension to an engineering works at Blackhill Quarry instead of returning the area to heathland as originally agreed.

The plan shows the outline application seeking approval for construction of up to 3251 sqm (35,000 sq. ft.) of B2 (general industrial) floor space with access, parking and associated infrastructure (details of appearance, landscaping, scale and layout reserved for future consideration) at Blackhill Quarry Woodbury Exeter EX5 1HD.

EDDC Planning Website 17/3022/MOUT

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

12 Dec 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Developers/ Development, Housing (local), Inequality, Land banking, Rural communities, Sustainability

The Times: “Builders shun brownfield sites” [what a surprise!]

Are we surprised? Oh, come on – of course not. And interesting that a council, for example, might spend, say, £10 million on a new HQ, but not have the “resources” to identify all suitable brownfield sites for housing in their district!

“Parts of the countryside are being needlessly sacrificed to build homes because thousands of small plots of previously developed land are being overlooked by councils, a study has found.

Sites with room for almost 200,000 homes are missing from official registers of brownfield, according to research by the Campaign to Protect Rural England (CPRE). These include former builders’ yards, disused warehouses and blocks of garages no longer used for parking.

The government says that it has a “brownfield first” policy when identifying land for more homes. To help to achieve this it has ordered all councils in England to publish registers by the end of this month of brownfield land suitable for development.

The CPRE examined 43 of the registers already published and found that only 4 per cent of the brownfield land they identified was on small sites that could accommodate up to ten homes.

In the budget last month the government announced that it wanted councils to identify enough small sites to provide 20 per cent of the new homes needed.

Philip Hammond, the chancellor, also said that the government would “ensure that our brownfield and scarce urban land is used as efficiently as possible”.

The CPRE found that if councils met the 20 per cent target on small brownfield sites, an additional 189,000 homes could be built in England.

It asked a sample of local authorities how they identified land for their brownfield registers and found that they “routinely disregarded small brownfield sites”.

Councils overlooked the sites even though they usually had infrastructure in place, such as rail and road links and schools and hospitals, which were less likely to be available for greenfield sites.

The reasons given by councils for not listing small brownfield sites included that they lacked the resources to identify them and that housebuilders did not favour them because of the perception that the planning system was too burdensome for small plots.

The CPRE said that the failure to identify small brownfield sites was resulting in councils allocating land for development in the green belt, the protected land around 14 cities.

It has called on the government to amend official guidance to ensure that councils identified all the available brownfield sites in their areas.

Rebecca Pullinger, CPRE’s planning campaigner, said: “Up and down the country tens of thousands of small brownfield sites are not included in brownfield land registers and their housing development potential missed.

“The current system of collecting this data must be improved if we are to unlock the potential of brownfield and stop developers finding an excuse to build on greenfield areas.”

In October Sajid Javid, the communities secretary, said on The Andrew Marr Show on BBC One: “I don’t believe that we need to focus on the green belt, there is lots of brownfield land, and brownfield first has been a policy of ours for a while.”

Source: The Times (pay wall)

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

4 Nov 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Economy, NHS (local), Privatisation, Sustainability

Public services are not, and should not be, businesses

“One of the greatest myths of our time is that public services can be made more efficient if we run them as businesses. The commercialisation of our public services has been a manifest failure, and the response offered by the mainstream parties is that we simply haven’t commercialised them enough. What they fail to understand is that a public service and a business are inherently different beasts and asking one to behave as the other is like asking a fish to ride a bicycle.

The primary aim of a public service lies within its name. This service exists to avoid negative social impacts and protect crucial social utilities from the instabilities of capitalism.

Within living memory it was considered basic common sense that essentials like food, water, energy, access to health services, housing, sanitation and sewage, social care and core manufacturing industries were too important to expose to the volatilities of the free market. Aside from this practical view, there were also two core value statements:

Profit should not be sought from a need to eat, heat a homes, drink water, healthcare or have a roof over their head.
2. Access to such necessities should not be based on an ability to pay.

Public services are democratic and accountable at the ballot box. Important matters like wages, pensions and working conditions are the result of negotiation and subject to internal and popular support.

Public services are funded by public money and managed by public representatives working together to deliver social utility. Every penny recycles within the public economy.

Neoliberal Capitalism is inherently unstable, creates inefficiencies and gaps in supply and demand, and does not create full employment. For these three reasons, critical services must be independent of capitalism, commercialisation and profit. In short, they must be universal and eternal.

This is the purpose of a public service.

A business, on the other hand is a commercial entity. The primary responsibility of a business is to create a profit for its shareholders. A corporation may well have other aims, but all must be subservient to this primary aim or the corporation will cease to exist, or be taken over by another corporation.

A business is not a democratic organisation. They are hierarchical, and wages, terms and conditions, are set by the executive and subject to the market forces. This can be mitigated to some degree by collective bargaining through unions, but workers in the private sector has historically delivered lower wages and reduced working conditions for the bulk of its employees.

Of the 23 million UK workers in the private sector, just 3.2 million (13.9%) have a workplace pension. Of the 6 million public sector workers, 5.3 million (88%) have a workplace pension.

Public sector employees are paid on average between 7.7% and 8.8% or £86 a week more than private sector workers. More significantly, this is a twelve year high in the wage gap, as private sector wages continue to fall in real terms.

The pay gap between the private and public sector is nothing compared to the pay gap within the private sector. Unlike the public sector where wages are clustered around a midpoint with a small proportion of very high and very low wages, the private sector has a great wage differential between its lowest and highest earners. Women are also paid a far higher average wage in the public sector, while constituting the bulk of the lowest paid workers in the private sector.

The public purse is picking up the bill for the wage and conditions gap in the form of large increases in state benefits paid to working people. As the current government remove these compensations, the failure of businesses to pay a living wage, together with clear provision for old age and care needs is exposed.

The privatised energy market has provided six energy giants, who dominate the market and have continued to deliver above inflation price rises whilst making record profits each year. The UK now rests at the very bottom of the league tables, with the worst fuel poverty in Western Europe.

The privatised railway is an example par excellence of total lack of accountability for failure to deliver. The rail service is, as always failing to raise sufficient ticket revenues to turn a profit. Ticket prices are rising above the rate of inflation. Train firms give the government £1.17bn in premiums to run their franchises, only for the government to hand them back £4bn in subsidies. So, instead of spending £140m in 1960’s money for a fully nationalised service where costs were kept low. We are now spending almost £3bn a year today simply to fund the profits of private companies. Network Rail profits doubled in 2012, and all rail franchises are running at a profit as the companies prioritise (as they have to, as businesses) making a profit rather than lowering ticket prices or investing in the network. Despite all this, the government are not complaining as they were when the service was nationalised, of a loss making service.

The move away from a social housing policy during the Thatcher government and continued since has been a disaster for housing. We are building 100,000 homes a year less than we need because the housing supply has been almost entirely handed over to the private sector to manage. The National Housing Federation issued a report last year which showed Housing Benefit has doubled in recent years as a direct result of an astronomical increase in housing costs. The report shows an 86% rise in housing benefit claims by working families, with 10,000 new claims coming in per month. House prices are now 300% higher (in real terms) than in 1959. If the price of a dozen eggs had risen as quickly, they would now cost £19. Rents across the UK have risen by an average of 37% in the UK in just the last three years.

The list could continue to include care, employment support services and a litany of other failed attempts to commercialise public services. The project is doomed.

There is No Such Thing as a Loss Making Public Service

If a business fails to recoup the costs of providing its service in money, it is described as running at a loss. This language of business is now being applied to our public services. When Dr Beeching dismantled the railways in 1963, the narrative then and now was that the rail network was losing £140m a year. This is commercial speak. This means the gap between ticket revenue and costs to run the service was £140m. If the railway was a business, this would be a loss. But it was a public service. A well-funded, serviceable, cheap at the point of use railway service was and is an important social utility. We need to be able to get our people around to work, to keep connected to family and friends, to transport goods up and down the country. So we all pitch in taxes and through an economy of scale we run a cooperative service. Unless someone is stealing, defrauding or otherwise ‘disappearing’ public funds, then there is no such thing as a loss making public service. The gap between ticket revenues and running costs in this case could have been entirely expected, since the priority was accessibility and maximum utility of the service. This idea is anathema to business.

[the paper goes on with more examples] …

… We have now reached the stage where enforced accountability of Politicians and those in Public Office is warranted on the grounds that patients are being injured and avoidable mortality is escalating in an NHS that has been engineered to fail. The preservation of Parliamentary Democracy may depend on the ability to make public figures accountable in the Courts.

We need to understand that there is a difference between the provision of healthcare and the causation of personal injury. The Health and Social Care Act 2008 cannot protect the Government from Criminal Negligence and causation of physical harm to patients. There can be no Nuremburg Defence by Government Officials and Agencies in relation to avoidable injuries to patients.”

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/nhs-trainwreck-funding-public-service-ninian-peckitt/

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

2 Nov 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Affordable and Social Housing, Austerity cuts, Consultation, East Devon Tories, Inequality, Sustainability

“How a city is tackling poverty by giving a voice to its poorest citizens”

Can’t see this catching on in East Devon, more’s the pity!

“It’s time to change politics,” says the Mayor of Salford, at a packed meeting of the Truth ­Poverty Commission in his home city. “Either politics is done to us, or we shape it.”

Since being elected a year ago, Mayor Paul Dennett has been radically reshaping the way things are done in Salford.

Last month he gave care workers a 10.7% pay rise. His town hall has given the go-ahead for seven new library sites at a time when many councils are closing them.

As other parts of the UK face ­maternity unit closures, the council has stepped in to ‘Keep Babies Born in Salford’ by opening a new midwife-led unit where 300 babies may now be delivered each year.

Salford has also invested £2million into a development company – in order to kickstart building of social housing that won’t fall under the government’s new Right To Buy policy. The company is called Derive – named after a joke involving ­revolutionary Italian situationists.

All of which looks like a blueprint for a Labour government, or what unashamedly interventionist Dennett calls “sensible socialism”.

The 36-year-old mayor is passionate about using his £200million budget to end poverty , partly because he has never forgotten what it feels like to come up the hard way, through a childhood he describes as at times “horrific” and something “I wouldn’t wish on anyone”.

Scarred by domestic abuse and his younger brother’s fight against leukaemia, he failed his GCSEs and A-levels and by 18 was working in a “sweat shop” call centre.

“I had an interesting journey,” he says wryly, at his offices in Swinton. “I grew up in a family where there was traumatic violence and abuse. My dad became an alcoholic and I struggled at school in my early teens.”

A power station fitter by trade, Paul’s dad went on to manage The Engine pub in Liverpool’s Prescot area, where his alcoholism began. Paul’s mum, a cleaner, ran the pub as her marriage disintegrated.

Later in life, Paul won a place to study International Business at the University of Ulster, where he achieved a first-class honours degree. He went on to Manchester ­Business school before doing a PhD at Manchester Met, working as a civil servant and then for a utilities company.

Now living in Salford – where he became a tenants’ leader and then a local councillor – as council leader he sees the Truth Poverty Commission as part of a new way of doing politics, with people’s consent.

Based on a model that has been used in Glasgow and Leeds, the Commissioners include people with experience of poverty.

“Consultation usually means organisations telling you about their plans,” says community worker Jayne Gosnall, 54, who is recovering from alcohol addiction. “This is about really listening to people with experience.”

The Commission is independent but supported by Salford City Council, the Mayor and the Bishop of Salford, and facilitated by Church Action on Poverty and Community Pride. It has led to the council bringing in a raft of measures that will transform lives – from waiving birth certificate fees for homeless people to changing the way the council chases debt.

Debbie Brown, transformation director at Salford City Council, says: “We come into these meetings and we hug each other – that’s not what normally happens in council meetings,” she says. “But the other thing that stopped me in my tracks was the City Council being identified as a cause of poverty.

“We heard stories about what it was like for people hiding from council tax collection agents, people being afraid, and that’s not a city I recognise.

“We’re changing a lot already. We’re going back to the personal, identifying people who are struggling to pay and looking again at what we can do.

“We won’t be using bailiffs for those in receipt of council tax reduction and young care leavers are exempt.”

Laura Kendall, 33, a mum of two and a youth worker, suffered undiagnosed mental health problems as a teenager and was placed in care.

“Sharing my story for this project was difficult but very powerful for me,” she says. “I want people to know their voices will be heard, that a child growing up in the care system can have a better chance.

“I’d spent my whole life trying to get people to listen to me and got used to being rejected. This area has been written off so many times but it’s full of people with something to add.”

Salford’s mayor is determined to listen. “This is about working-class communities coming together and a spirit of solidarity,” Dennett says. “It’s the spirit of Salford in action.”

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/how-city-tackling-poverty-giving-11457050

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

31 Oct 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Health and Social Care (local), Inequality, NHS (local), Privatisation, Sustainability

“Care Closer to Home”: the Torquay experience (not good)

“Concerns that care in the community is failing some Torbay and South Devon residents have been raised by a health campaign body.

Gordon Jennings, chairman of the Community Health and Welfare Alliance, set up at the time of the consultation on the closures of community hospitals in Torbay and South Devon, said they feared the consequences of the closure of at least 74 beds across Torbay alone. One of the main providers of care in the area Mears Care was recently taken out of special measures by Government inspectors but they still rated it as ‘requiring improvement.’

It comes after Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust marked the second anniversary of the launch of the pioneering integrated care organisation in the area.

Mr Jennings said: “We are concerned as we have a high proportion of over 80s in the population, we should be making sure there are suitable arrangements for those people. The integrated care organisation’s argument is that the alternative to community hospitals is care at home. But they haven’t got the staff for home care. How are you going to get quality of care? Changes usually mean improvement, but it’s arguable that under the Devon NHS Sustainability and Transformation Plan (STP) this is not always the case and is a series of cuts – including the loss of 100 hospital beds.

“Evidence is being gathered on experiences under ‘Care in the Home’, but we would implore Torbay communities to become involved and share your experiences with Healthwatch Torbay, Paignton Library, who are conducting ‘have your voice heard today’ consultation on this and other health subjects.

“We need to remind ourselves that South Devon and Torbay Clinical Commissioning Group admitted at the consultation meetings in regards the lack of staff in this area. With your help it is our intention, not only to seek a meeting with the CCG, with these findings, but also Torbay Council Health and Well Being Board, who have a responsibility in this area.

“We have been seeking evidence that it isn’t working and we have had some cases come forward but we are looking for more. If people can write to us with their concerns we can take it up with the right people.”

Dr Kevin Dixon, chairman of Torbay’s independent consumer champion for health and social care, Healthwatch Torbay, said: “Healthwatch Torbay regularly shares an extensive variety of local feedback from Torbay residents on hospital discharge and community care with both Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust and the Care Quality Commission, along with relevant providers and health commissioners, in order to contribute to their intelligence reports and prompt them into any relevant action.

“Although we have heard public concerns with both discharge and community care, we have also received praise for both.

“The findings of the CQC report into Mears Care Ltd. were reflected in the feedback we have gathered from those people who shared their experiences with us, which indicated that although there was some improvement in the quality of care Mears have provided since the original CQC report in 2016, a number of issues still exist.

“We remain committed to escalating any public complaints and concerns directly with Mears Care Ltd. and continue to monitor the quality of care they provide. Healthwatch Torbay will carry on gathering local public feedback and sharing it with key decision-makers to ensure the public voice is listened to at a commissioning level.”

Michael Rennolds of Coombe Road, Preston, has muscular dystrophy and Muscular Dystrophy UK say the condition is a progressive and life limiting muscular wasting condition for which there is no cure and no effective treatment. That means he has high needs.

Joel Rackham, care and information advocacy officer has written to Torbay and South Devon Healthcare Trust saying Michael required constant individualised care and intervention over each 24- hour period including regular physiotherapy, support with food and drink, toileting and bathing needs.

They say it is critical an up-to-date care plan is in place. But they say he has lost out on several respite days as well as his care hours were reduced from 84 hours a week to 41 which the charity say is ‘insufficient to meet his care needs’ .

At the same time £16,200 was taken out of his bank account which would have been used to pay for care. The charity has asked for the money to be reinstated and say it is ‘not fair’ to expect his mother, who works part time to be expected to care for him as her health is being affected and she cannot be expected to handle Mr Rennolds on her own.

The charity has asked for a minimum of 98 hours of care per week, more than double the amount budgeted for.

Nic Bungay, director of Campaigns, Care and Information at Muscular Dystrophy UK told Devon Live: “Without the right support in place, the difficult job of helping Michael to get out of bed, get dressed, eat his meals and live his life will fall on his mother Susan. The severe and progressive nature of Duchenne muscular dystrophy means that any reduction in care is wrong, but cutting the hours in half and leaving an entire day without any provision is unthinkable. His hours need to rise to the recommended 98 hours a week immediately.”

Mrs Rennolds said the money has still not been reinstated and she had been told the consideration of her complaint had again been adjourned.

“The NHS have taken the £16,200 out of Michael’s bank account, because he wouldn’t sign some papers that were in dispute. Only an idiot would sign some papers they disputed. The charity has written stating that money has to be put back. Michael is really down about this.”

A Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust spokesman, said: “We are currently in the process of responding directly to Mr Rennolds’ complaint. “We are fully committed to providing our clients with the best possible care. We work hard to ensure that people stay as healthy and independent as possible and that those who would be at risk of injury, illness or isolation are cared for as a priority. Each client will have their individual needs professionally assessed on a regular basis and our health and care professionals will work with them to identify the best way for their needs to be met. This means we can be sure we continue to meet individual’s changing needs.

“Whilst we cannot discuss individual client cases, when clients have their needs and care plans reassessed, we always do this working in partnership with the person and jointly agree the outcome.

Direct payments are made to meet an individual’s specific care needs. In addition, as part of the national guidelines, all recipients of Direct Payments sign an agreement that states that we reserve the right to reclaim money that is not being used. If people in receipt of direct payments accumulate a significant amount of money saved from their direct payments, in line with these national guidelines, we will recover a proportion of this money which will then go towards providing care for other vulnerable people. When monies are recovered, we will always ensure a significant proportion still remains in their Direct Payment account to cover their own care costs as well as a contingency for any unexpected expenditure.”

Marilyn and Ivor Martin, of Salisbury Avenue, Torquay say they are struggling with the level of care offered at home after Ivor, 68, had a serious stroke.

Marilyn said he had a stroke out of the blue one lunchtime which has left him affected all down the left side and incontinent. She said: “I cannot fault the hospital staff at all, the ambulance staff they were incredible. He was moved to Newton Abbot and his care there was wonderful, impeccable. Then I had a visit from occupational therapy from Newton Abbot who said he was coming home. I said my house isn’t suitable.

“I have steps in my garden, I was told there was no money to do that. I have a corner bath and they said there were no aids to get him in and out of the bath so he would have to strip wash and he would need to for the rest of his life if needs be. If I wanted adaptations I would have to pay for it myself. I was offered handrails which would take six to eight weeks to install after he got home. He couldn’t get upstairs and I said I was not having him home if it was not safe. They said I would have to put a bed in the dining room. I don’t have a single bed but was told I would have to buy or borrow one. They put a rail on my bed upstairs, a commode, a rail around the toilet so he could get himself up.

“I was told if I don’t have him home he would have to go in a care home. That would cost hundreds of pounds, money which should be put into caring for people in the community. We had him home and within three days he had a hospital appointment at 12noon. I was told there would be transport but it would come at anytime between 9.30am and 11.30am, and they would pick him up any time between 1pm and 4pm. He’s incontinent, he would be sat at the hospital all that time without food. I was told ‘that’s the way it is’. We had three appointments in one week for the heart and lung department, but they said they couldn’t arrange for them all on one day so we had to get him up there three times. I took him up with my son’s girlfriend who helped, but I am lifting him in and out the car and I had open heart surgery last year. There is no thought about the carers.

“They said that while I was at work, there could be someone coming in the morning to dress him and someone to give him a sandwich at lunchtime. They said they could come any time between 7.30pm to 10.30am. He wouldn’t stay in bed that late, he’d be getting himself up and falling. I can’t have that. Then they could be back at 11am and 2pm getting him lunch. It’s ludicrous.

“I had help filling out the forms for attendance allowance but you can’t have that until they have been ill for six months. I have spent nearly £4,000 on having a ramp put in the garden and shower unit changed and putting in a second hand stairlift. The physios have been fantastic but suddenly they were told they weren’t coming again until October. His arm isn’t working at all and his hand is swollen. It’s not right. Having the physio in really boosts his morale as well. If you are going to have care in the community you have to the people to do it. Ivor could go swimming at Plainmoor Pool but there’s no way to get help taking him there, I have got to do it. If someone doesn’t have someone at home to help how do they get there?

“There needs to be an organisation that sets up a package and says you will need this, this and this and get it organised for you. In hospital they were fantastic every single nurse and doctor, but if you are going to do care in the community you need to set up what people need before you throw them out there. Nobody is helping us. “

Torbay and South Devon NHS Foundation Trust, the integrated care organisation responsible for social care in Torbay, said they could not comment as they had not had a direct complaint from the Martins. On the question of a shortage of carers a trust spokesman said: “We recognise that, like other places in the country, having enough people with the right skills and training to provide domiciliary care for people to be able to continue to be supported at home is a challenge. And there are a number of things we are doing to ensure the right level of care can be provided including supporting the campaign ‘Loving to Care’ to encourage more people to enter this very rewarding career.

A key part of how we are addressing the challenge is our partnership with a national provider of domiciliary care, Mears, This partnership helps to ensure enough carers are recruited, trained and supported to develop their skills. We extend our training and support so that carers working for all care providers are able to benefit from our training provision. This is an incredibly worthwhile profession and by supporting providers to be able to offer increased opportunities for development of their staff they are not only gaining important skills they also benefit from greater job satisfaction and are more likely to want stay in the caring profession.

“In addition to this support we also offer alternatives for people , such as direct payments which enables people to employ their own support assistant directly.”

Torbay residents can share their experiences by calling Healthwatch free on 08000 520 029, visiting upstairs at Paignton library, or even by rating and reviewing a local health and social care service online via http://www.healthwatchtorbay.org.uk. If you have a case write to Mr G Jennings, c/o Acorn Centre, Lummaton Cross, Torquay, TQ2 8ET.”

http://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/south-devons-pioneering-care-community-708511

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

30 Oct 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Consultation, DCC, East Devon Alliance, Health and Social Care (local), Independent Councillors, Martin Shaw (Seaton), NHS (local), Seaton/ Colyford / Colyton, Sustainability

“Axe Valley health hub plan launched as campaigners fight hospital sell off”

“Campaigners will continue to fight plans to sell off Seaton Hospital and to support plans for a new health hub for the Axe Valley. …

[Independent East Devon Alliance] County councillor Martin Shaw [Seaton and Colyton] said: “Forty campaigners from the Axe Valley area met in Seaton this week to review the state of the campaign for the local hospitals.

“I told the meeting that while the battle to save Seaton’s hospital beds had been lost, it had put Seaton on the map in the forthcoming discussions about health services in the area.”

Mayor of Seaton, Cllr Jack Rowland, said that a meeting to set up a steering committee for an Axe Valley Health Hub would take place shortly.

He was encouraged that the Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital Trust was putting resources into this and he also pointed out that more than fifty services involving over a hundred staff were still based at the hospital.

Campaigners will continue to fight plans to sell off Seaton Hospital and to support plans for a new health hub for the Axe Valley.

In August, a vigil was held outside Seaton Hospital as the beds inside the hospital were closed, as protesters waved banners, shouted “shame”, and expressed their anger and sadness outside Seaton Hospital as the controversial closures of community hospitals began.

Plans to remove the beds from Exeter, Seaton, Honiton and Okehampton community hospitals have been met with strong opposition since they were confirmed in March.

The North, East and West (NEW) Devon Clinical Commissioning Group (CCG) said the move will see more people being given care at home and save £2.6million.

Although the battle to save the hospital beds has been lost, a new campaign though has been set up in the Axe Valley area to support the development of a health hub in the region.

County councillor Martin Shaw said: “Forty campaigners from the Axe Valley area met in Seaton this week to review the state of the campaign for the local hospitals.

“I told the meeting that while the battle to save Seaton’s hospital beds had been lost, it had put Seaton on the map in the forthcoming discussions about health services in the area.”

He was encouraged that the Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital Trust was putting resources into this and he also pointed out that more than fifty services involving over a hundred staff were still based at the hospital. ‘Don’t let anyone say the hospital is closed’, he said.

The meeting, chaired by Paul Arnott of the East Devon Alliance, agreed that it was necessary to establish which health services could most usefully be based in Seaton and Axminster hospitals, and this might involve canvassing the views of local residents and a number of people present offered to help with this.

The meeting decided to set up a new Axe Valley Hospitals Campaign to support the development of a health hub around the two hospitals and to oppose any proposals to sell off hospital sites.”

http://www.devonlive.com/news/health/axe-valley-health-hub-plan-699423

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

28 Oct 2017

Posted under

Clyst St Mary, Developers/ Development, Development Management Committee, Flooding, Sustainability

Update on Winslade Park (Clyst St Mary) planning application

PRESS RELEASE

“I have been advised that the planning application for Winslade Park, Clyst St Mary has been removed from the agenda for 31st October. This request was made by the owners of the site to East Devon District Council and came about as a result of the concerns made by the residents of Clyst St Mary.

At this stage, we don’t yet know if or when the application will go back on the agenda.

The Save Clyst St Mary group remains committed to ensuring East Devon District Council and the Applicant reach the right decision for our village with regard to this application. Any proposal should be both safe and sustainable.

On a different note, the planning application for Enfield Farm is still on the agenda and should be heard by the Devolopment Management Committee in the afternoon of 31st October. We have two residents speaking for us on Tuesday; should you wish to support them please feel free to do so.

On behalf of the SCSM team, please can I thank you all for your ongoing support over these past three years.”

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

14 Sep 2017

Posted under

Accountability, EDDC, Sustainability, Transport (local)

Councillor and council officer parking perks

Devon County
Staff pay between 50p and £2 per day depending on salary and there are two compulsory car-free days. No information on cost to councillors.
Visitors: up to £7 per day.

Exeter City Council:
120 people can park £2 per day in council car parks in Exeter for which the public must pay £10 per day. No information on who the 120 people are and whether some or all are councillors.

North, East, Mid and West Devon:
Free parking for officers, councillors and visitors.
(Almost every year Independent Councillor Roger Giles presses for charges to be introduced and each time he is voted down)

Plymouth:
Staff
Permits for £50 per month in nearby car park. No information on whether or not this includes councillors.

Torridge and Torbay:
Refused to provide the information – Freedom of Information request made.

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

12 Sep 2017

Posted under

Air pollution, Cranbrook, Developers/ Development, Environment (local), Greater Exeter, Skypark, Sustainability, Transport (local)

How do you spot a development site? Look for a road tunnel!

This article contains a useful overview of the Clyst Honiton bypass tunnel, whose lights are being replaced by LEDs.

But the accompanying aerial view of it is the more interesting photo:

http://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/clyst-honiton-bypass-tunnel-near-463174

It is a “Growth Point” development site

http://www.exetersciencepark.co.uk/news-events/25-news/77-clyst-honiton-bypass

and, obviously, a new road could not interfere with that given its access to vastly more development land a la Lidl and Skypark!

With the airport and other developments in “Greater Exeter”, will Cranbrook become one of the most polluted places in Devon?

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

15 Aug 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Claire Wright, Health and Social Care (local), Honiton/ Gittisham, NHS (local), Privatisation, Rural communications, Seaton/ Colyford / Colyton, Sustainability

Comments

2 Comments

East Devon community bed closures to be speeded up – Seaton to close next week, Honiton the week after

From the blog of Claire Wright – did Diviani and Randall-Johnson know this? Do they care?

“I have seen this SO many times.

A threat to hospital beds. Hospital beds close temporarily due to staffing shortages (because understandably staff leave) and then the permanent closures are brought forward.

What I am not reassured on here is how the loss of the existing beds will morph into the new care at home service and the message on staff redeployment is as vague as ever. Last autumn, I was told by the CCG chair, Tim Burke that around double the number of staff will be appointed… the CCG now talks in terms of ‘redeployment’ and ‘recruitment’ of 50 staff, which is difficult to get to the bottom of, given what we have already been told.

What we also still don’t know (because the CCG won’t tell us) is what happens to those hospitals that lose their beds…

Devon County Council’s health scrutiny committee needs to keep a very close eye indeed, on this issue.

The letter below has been sent to Health Scrutiny committee members:

Your Future Care

I am writing to let you know that we are ready to proceed with the changes to improve care for people across Eastern Devon as part ‘Your Future Care’.

These changes are intended to shift the focus of health and care services to keep more people well and independent at home. Part of this shift will be the redeployment and recruitment of over 50 nursing, therapy and support worker roles to enhance the existing community services in each local area. This will enable the reduction in the number of community inpatient beds across the Eastern locality of Devon.

In order to achieve this safely, we will take a phased approach – working closely with staff and partners – to implement the changes as per the following timetable:

• Seaton Community Hospital week commencing 21 August 2017
• Okehampton Community Hospital week commencing 21 August 2017
• Honiton Community Hospital week commencing 28 August 2017
• Exeter Community Hospital week commencing 4 September 2017 (this is the original closure timetable).

The provision of inpatient services at these locations will cease from these dates. All other services at these hospitals will continue as normal. Patients in these areas in medical need of a community inpatient bed will be accommodated at either Tiverton, Sidmouth or Exmouth hospitals, depending on where they live.

It has become apparent over the last couple of weeks that the schedule for the closure of the in-patient beds at Seaton, Okehampton and Honiton would need to be brought forward by a number of weeks due to the increasing pressures on safely staffing the current configuration of seven community inpatient units.

We have been preparing the comprehensive plans for each area since March 2017 and are confident that moving to the new model swiftly is in the best interests for our patients and our staff. For example, our new Community Connect out-of-hospital service, introduced this Spring, has already led to a reduction in demand for community inpatient beds.

Gateway Assurance Process

As you may be aware, part of the implementation process included a clinical assurance panel reviewing the implementation plans against a series of 30 gateway questions. These were developed to provide assurance of the RD&E’s and the wider system’s readiness to switch to the Your Future Care model.

The Gateway Assurance Panel has given its recommendation to proceed. The workforce HR consultation has been completed and staff have been informed of their new roles and working environments. We have also received the approval of the Equality and Quality Impact Assessments, which took place on the 4th August. We can now commence the redeployment of staff into our enhanced community teams and into the remaining community hospital sites. This change will provide extra capacity and resilience to meet the needs of our local population.

Your Future Care is just the beginning of the work needed to move fully to a model of care which proactively averts health crises and promotes independence and wellbeing for our population.

There is still much more to be done and we at the RD&E look forward to continuing this in partnership with you and our local communities.

Yours sincerely,

Adel Jones
Integration Director”

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

14 Aug 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Coastal communities, Developers/ Development, EDDC, Greater Exeter, National Parks, Rural communities, Sustainability, Tourism

Comments

2 Comments

Is it time for some more rebellious towns?

Colyton proudly announces itself as “the most rebellious town in Devon” for its part in supporting the Duke of Monmouth against James the Second.

Is it now time for another rebellion?

EDDC is the largest District Council in Devon with a population of about 140,000. It is growing rapidly. All this is happening against the backdrop of relocating EDDC’s headquarters and possible mergers amongst councils, in particular the creation of Greater Exeter.

Does everyone in East Devon want to be part of this process of rapid population growth and incorporation into the Exeter conurbation?

Residents of Exmouth, Honiton and Cranbrook may well look towards Exeter and work in the city, but our more rural and coastal communities increasingly see crowded and congested Exeter as something of which they do not wish to be a part. They tend to look towards the slower population growth and protection of the environment that can be found across the border in Dorset.

Budleigh Salterton, Sidmouth, Beer, Colyton and Seaton, and perhaps Ottery, seem to see themselves more as operating in an economy linked primarily to tourism and agriculture. They have no wish or requirement to be absorbed into the Exeter behemoth. Cleaner and greener.

These communities also have little representation in the hierarchy at Knowle, (or even acknowledged by Greater Exeter) where the leadership is dominated by councillors from Exmouth, Honiton and Axminster.

In such circumstances, and with relocation offering a timely opportunity, is it not time to seriously consider splitting the District Council and introducing a healthy dose of localism?

We already see many functions and services involving cross-authority cooperation. Such sharing of services could and should continue were coastal East Devon to secede. But those coastal communities would have far greater control over their own affairs.

Is it time for Eastern East Devon, or perhaps “Jurassic Devon”, to secede from EDDC and withdraw from the Greater Exeter project?

And maybe join with Dorset’s idea of a Jurassic National Park?

All it takes is a few rebellious people to get it started!

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

9 Aug 2017

Posted under

Environment (local), Exmouth, Sustainability

Exmouth: water-skiiers or wetlands? Powerboats or peregrine falcons?

“Sailors, kite surfers and other water users on the Exe Estuary want plans for two exclusion zones to protect wildlife scrapped, claiming they would cause conflict among them and could force them out the water.

Pete Hardy, from the Exe Powerboat and Ski Club, described the plans as “very frustrating” and claims water users concerns are not being listened to.

“Powerboating would be affected by the other sports being pushed into our area and it would lead to conflict between powerboaters, kite surfers and paddle boarders,” he said.

But Exe Estuary Management Partnership says in its eight months of consultation it has listened to “hundreds” of views and, as a direct result, has amended some proposals.

It says human activity directly influences the distribution and behaviour of wildlife on the Exe and with more people choosing to live, work and holiday in the area, the number of water users will continue to rise.

Wildlife charities have declined to comment before the consultation period finishes tomorrow.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-england-devon-40777250

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

7 Aug 2017

Posted under

Developers/ Development, Economy, EDDC, Local Enterprise Partnership, Local Plan, Sustainability

Comments

1 Comment

Why “growth” is almost impossible in East Devon

Our Local Enterprise Partnership trumpets “growth, growth, we must have growth to prosper” and EDDC chose the highest growth figures to ensure its Local Plan got LOTS of housing. But they both seem to have forgotten something that their bible, the Daily Telegraph, now points out:

“Britain’s productivity crisis risks getting worse because the population is ageing steadily, leaving relatively fewer younger, more dynamic workers who typically innovate more.

Unless drastic action is taken to boost skills and creativity, or to increase the number of young workers, then growth will struggle to pick up, according to new economic research published in the journal of the National Institute of Economic and Social Research.

“The share of young workers impacts the innovation process positively and, as a result, a change in the demographic profile that skews the distribution of the population to the right [older], leads to a decline in innovation activity,” said the paper, written by Yunus Aksoy, Henrique Basso and Ron Smith. …

To avert a sustained slowdown they recommend that governments should look at ways to make the dwindling proportion of young people more productive.

“Unless there are drastic changes most OECD countries will need to devise new policies to foster medium-run economic growth in an environment with ageing population, perhaps by increasing investment in human capital,” the researchers believe.

Alternative options are also available, but some may be less politically palatable – for instance, encouraging greater flows of migrants of working age into the country.

“Demographics are not destiny and our conclusions assume that there will not be major changes in rates of immigration, labour force participation, fertility or longevity,” the economists said.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2017/08/07/ageing-population-make-productivity-crisis-worse/

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

3 Aug 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Austerity cuts, Democracy, Privatisation, Sustainability

The (ir)responsibility of politicians

This long article is about the crisis in prisons. But the last four paragraphs quoted here could be about anything that is the responsibility of politicians:

“Who allowed this systematic irresponsibility? Civil servants could no doubt have been more robust in their advice. But the truth is that Grayling and Gove [and here add names of other ministers] at least did not broach any challenge. Any senior officials that they felt were obstructing their plans or raising awkward questions were edged out. It’s tough to push back when your job is at stake.

No doubt some governors and prison officers could have done more to raise problems and find solutions – but most of them had crises to manage.

The only conclusion I can really draw is that the blame lies with the politicians. They cut prison budgets without having a good understanding of the likely impact, then carried on cutting long after those consequences were clear. They focused on pet projects rather than getting the basics right.

They were supported in doing so from the very top. Cameron and Osborne [and now May and Hammond] made the call that people didn’t much care about the condition of our prisons [hospitals/schools/environment], and if budgets were to be cut this was a place to cut particularly deeply. They ignored signs that the system was creaking, and forgot that changing your justice secretary [or any minister except Hunt where no-one wanted his job] every 18 months is a sure-fire way to create problems. Most important, they forgot that there is no better symbol that government is out of control than riots [bed shortages/failing schools/concrete jungles] within the facilities they are meant to run.”

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/aug/02/prisoners-rioting-serial-ministerial-incompetence-justice-chris-grayling-michael-gove

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

2 Aug 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Corruption, Developers/ Development, Environment (local), Freedom of Information and EIA, Planning System, Sleaze, Sustainability

Planning decisions must take air quality into account – so a council falsified the data

NOT the developer, the COUNCIL. Do we need any better evidence that it appears some councils no longer work for us but DO appear to work for (andcan be corrupted by) developers?

Cheshire East is the council that has suspended its CEO, its Financial Officer and Chief Legal Officer for unknown reasons. The CEO formerly worked at Torbay.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-manchester-39495102

Though, of course, suspension is a neutral act and doesnot imply guilt.

http://www.knutsfordguardian.co.uk/news/15416114.Second_senior_management_suspension_as_Cheshire_East_Council_investigates_misconduct_allegations/

On that air pollution scandal:

“A local authority has admitted its air pollution data was deliberately manipulated for three years to make it look cleaner.

Cheshire East council apologised after serious errors were made in air quality readings from 2012 to 2014.

It is reviewing planning applications amid fears falsified data may have affected decisions in at least five towns. It said it would reveal the full list of sites affected this week.

When considering planning applications councillors have to look at several factors, including whether a development will introduce new sources of air pollution or release large amounts of dust during construction.

Government’s air quality plan branded inadequate by city leaders
“It is clear that these errors are the result of deliberate and systematic manipulation of data from a number of diffusion tubes,” a statement on the council website said.

Sean Hannaby, the director of planning and sustainable development, said: “On behalf of the council I would like to sincerely apologise in respect of these findings, we would like to assure everyone that we have done everything we can to rectify these failings.”

He added: “There are no immediate health protection measures needed as a result of these errors.”

Cheshire East council, like all other authorities, monitors nitrogen dioxide levels on sites throughout the borough as part of work to improve air quality. The information is then submitted to the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra).

Oliver Hayes, a Friends of the Earth air pollution campaigner, said the fact that the data was falsified was outrageous. He said: “Residents will rightly be wondering what this means for their and their families’ health. The council needs to be fully transparent about how far the numbers were manipulated and what impact this has had on the local area.”

He added: “If this is happening in Cheshire East, where else across the country are pollution figures being lied about? … National and local government need to get serious about dealing with this invisible killer, not just cooking the books and hoping the issue will go away.”

An internal review by council auditors last year found the air quality data submitted was different to the original data from the council’s monitoring equipment. It prompted an external investigation, the results of which were released last week.

The falsified data was from testing stations spread over a wide geographical area, according to the report. It noted: “The air quality team have reviewed their internal processes and procedures to ensure that the risk of data adjustment is minimised. There are now a number of quality control measures in place.”

Cheshire police said officers would review the case to establish if any criminal offences occurred.

A Defra spokesperson said: “We are aware of this issue and understand the local authority is now considering its response to the investigation.”

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/aug/02/cheshire-east-council-admits-falsifying-air-pollution-data

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

21 Jul 2017

Posted under

Austerity cuts, Beer, DCC, Martin Shaw, Seaton/ Colyford / Colyton, Sustainability, Transport (local)

Seaton and Beer risk being cut off from Exeter by proposed bus service reduction

Press release:

“At Devon County Council yesterday, Seaton & Colyton’s Independent East Devon Alliance councillor, Martin Shaw, asked Councillor Roger Croad, Cabinet Member for Transportation, if the Council would support peak services on the X52 bus service from Seaton and Beer to Exeter, which are threatened with closure by First Wessex.

First Wessex proposes to run only two off-peak buses a day in each direction from September. While better than nothing, these are inadequate for people in Seaton and Beer who want to work or study in Exeter or get to appointments at the Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital. Relying just on these services, people would barely be able to spend an hour in Exeter before having to get the bus back.

This is the only service direct from Seaton and Beer to the RD&E and this narrow window will not enable people to get to appointments. Using other services, people in Beer who want to get to the hospital will have to change twice in Seaton and Exeter Bus Station and the journey which currently takes an hour will take more than two hours each way, making it arduous and impractical for many people.

Councillor Croad initially replied to suggest that people could use these alternative routes. In a supplementary question, Councillor Shaw suggested that since hospital services are increasingly being centralised in the RD&E, the withdrawal of direct bus services discriminates against people without cars in communities like Seaton and Beer which are on the periphery of Devon. ‘Seaton is further from the RD&E than any other town in Devon and has the oldest population profile of any town in Devon’, he said. ‘We need direct public transport links to the acute hospital in Exeter.’

Councillor Croad then said that if Councillor Shaw would meet him afterwards, he would discuss the issue. When they talked, Councillor Croad agreed to look further at the question. The supplementary question and the reply can be seen from 1:47:50 to 1:49:15 on https://devoncc.public-i.tv/core/portal/webcast_interactive/283676.”

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

17 Jul 2017

Posted under

Developers/ Development, East Devon economy, Greater Exeter, Infrastructure, Sustainability

Exeter fourth largest growth rate in UK

Surely at this rate the Exeter area economy will become greatly overheated with an inevitable crash, especially as we are told that 70% of its exports currently go to the EU? Will East Devon, with Cranbrook’s creep towards the city just become a suburb of an ever-sprawling Greater Exeter but with no supporting infrastructure to speak of?

“Exeter is in the top five cities in the UK for job creation, new figures have revealed.

The UK Powerhouse report, produced by law firm Irwin Mitchell alongside the Centre for Business and Economic research, provides an estimate of the value of goods and services produced and annual job growth of 45 of the UK’s largest cities, 12 months ahead of the Government’s official figures.

Exeter sees an annual change of 1.5 per cent when it comes to employment, putting it as fourth in the UK.

It also revealed the growing importance that the banking, finance and insurance sector has on the city, revealing that 5,900 jobs were created between 2013 and 2016.

The report also predicts that Exeter’s city economy will grow by 18.1 per cent over the next 10 years whilst employment will grow by 9.4 per cent during the same period.

Jack Coy, economist at Cebr, said: “Despite the UK-level economic slowdown over the first quarter, it is good to see some bright sparks in local economies across the country.

“In particular, the best performing cities have benefitted from a combination of cutting-edge, productive industries and high-skilled workforces.”

http://www.devonlive.com/exeter-fourth-best-city-in-country-for-employment-growth/story-30444024-detail/story.html

Standard

Posted by

Posted on

17 Jul 2017

Posted under

Accountability, Asset sweating, Coastal communities, Councillor Cathy Gardner EDA, East Devon Alliance, EDDC, Regeneration, Sidmouth/ Sidford/ Sidbury, Sustainability

Comments

3 Comments

“38 degrees” petition started on plans for Sidmouth’s Port Royal

“To: East Devon District Council c/o P Diviani and Sidmouth Town Council

Alternative plan for Sidmouth’s Port Royal – the 3R’s

Include our alternative plan for Port Royal: Retain, Refurbish, Reuse in your regeneration proposal in place of the current ‘multi-use development’.

Why is this important?

In October this year EDDC will decide on future development for the Port Royal area of our seafront. This follows a scoping study done in conjunction with Sidmouth Town Council. The large-scale development put forward in the consultation (and as proposed in the Local Plan) will have a huge impact on the views, use of the area and change its unique character. People in Sidmouth have been asking why the area can’t remain as it is, with subtle improvements and changes. We now call on EDDC to reconsider their plan for a large new building and adopt our proposal to Retain, Refurbish and Reuse. Retain existing buildings, allow careful refurbishment of the whole area and open up discussions on potential uses for the Drill Hall.

How it will be delivered

Delivery in person, to the Leader and Chair of EDDC and the Chair of STC”

https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/alternative-plan-for-sidmouth-s-port-royal-the-3r-s?source=facebook-share-button&time=1500191579