“Watchdog launches review of local government ethical standards”

The call for evidence closes at 5 pm on 18 May 2018. Owl is fairly sure that there will be LOTS of evidence in East Devon!

“The Committee on Standards in Public Life has launched a review of local government ethical standards with a call for evidence.

The terms of reference for the review are to:

examine the structures, processes and practices in local government in England for:

– maintaining codes of conduct for local councillors
– investigating alleged breaches fairly and with due process
– enforcing codes and imposing sanctions for misconduct
– declaring interests and managing conflicts of interest
– whistleblowing

assess whether the existing structures, processes and practices are conducive to high standards of conduct in local government

make any recommendations for how they can be improved

note any evidence of intimidation of councillors, and make recommendations for any measures that could be put in place to prevent and address such intimidation

The review will consider all levels of local government in England, including town and parish councils, principal authorities, combined authorities (including Metro Mayors) and the Greater London Authority (including the Mayor of London).

The review will be led by committee member Dr Jane Martin CBE. She said: “Robust arrangements to support ethical standards are needed to safeguard local democracy and facilitate the representative process, but also to ensure high standards of conduct by councillors. The Committee considers it is timely to undertake a health check of local government so the public can have confidence that the standards arrangements supporting local democracy are working effectively.

“The Committee has maintained a longstanding interest in local government ethical standards, and regularly receives correspondence from members of the public expressing their concern about this issue.”

Dr Martin added: “We are keen to hear first-hand how effective councils’ standards arrangements are, in light of the substantial changes in the standards landscape for local government over the last ten years.

“We are interested in how local authorities have designed their complaints handling, scrutiny and sanctions regimes in order to maintain excellent ethical standards and how members, local government officials and the public experience them.

“The Committee would like to hear from councils and individuals who can help us understand how ethical standards issues are dealt with by local authorities.”

The call for evidence closes at 5 pm on 18 May 2018.

The CSPL said that, based on the submissions to the review and meetings with key stakeholders, it intended to publish its findings and recommendations late in 2018.”

http://localgovernmentlawyer.co.uk/index.php

Tory ex-Ministers hawk their influence for cash

Owl says: Does this disgraceful behaviour go top down, bottom up – or both? Owlis of the opinion it is the latter!

Former cabinet ministers have been exposed attempting to profit from a new cash for Brexit gravy train in Westminster, following an undercover investigation.

Lord Lansley, the former health secretary, was secretly filmed offering to use his knowledge and connections from within West­minster to provide “intelligence” on Brexit to a Chinese company offering him tens of thousands of pounds.

The peer, who has previously been accused of “ripping the heart” out of a bill to regulate lobby­ing, showed he was willing to pick up information from a key Brexit cabinet minister. He advised how the deal could be kept secret from the authorities by employing him through his wife’s company.

Peter Lilley, the former deputy Conservative Party leader, was also willing to approach key ministers on the Chinese company’s behalf. As part of his pitch for the job he described how he attended two advisory groups with influence over the Brexit minis­ters, one of which has never previously been revealed.

A third former minister, Andrew Mitchell MP, also appeared happy to give paid Brexit advice to the Chinese company. He charges £6,000 a day and disclosed that he was looking to work up to 10 weeks a year for private clients despite being paid £74,962 as an MP. “My constituents don’t mind what I’m paid,” he said.

The three men were secretly filmed as part of a joint undercover investigation by The Sunday Times and Channel 4’s Dispatches into politicians improperly making money from Britain’s negotiations to leave the European Union. …”

[there follows several pages of sleazy revelations]

Source: Sunday Times (pay wall)

Who holds academies (and every other privatised service) to account?

” An Observer piece questions the growth of academy schools, warning that: “There is no evidence that, on average, academy chains do any better at managing schools than the local authorities they replaced. Instead, the reforms have created a structural mess, opening up profound gaps in accountability and governance.” The paper also reports that six out of 10 of the biggest academy trusts have raised “warnings over pressures on pay, staffing levels, building maintenance and mounting deficits”, which “raises the spectre of what would happen if a major academy chain were to go bust”.

The Observer, Page: 46

 

PFI – a licence to print money?

“Carillion made £500m in revenue from selling off Private Finance Initiative (PFI) projects between 2003 and 2011, with many deals handing the construction firm returns of more than 15 per cent per year.

The most lucrative sale was of three NHS hospital buildings in Staffordshire, Swindon and Glasgow in 2007 which netted Carillion a 38.7 per cent annual return, according to analysis by the European Services Strategy Unit (ESSU). Around £200m of the sales came after 2010, the figures show.

Several of the purchasers are based offshore meaning they pay no UK corporation tax on the profits they derive from the schemes, which are ultimately paid for by taxpayers, the ESSU research found. …

… There are currently 735 operational PFI and PF2 deals, with a capital value of around £60bn. Annual charges for these deals amounted to £10.3bn in 2016-17, the NAO found. Even if no new deals are entered into, future charges which continue until the 2040s will amount to £199bn.

Earlier research by the ESSU found that nine offshore funds own between 50 per cent and 100 per cent of the equity in 335 PFI projects across the UK. The funds own 45 per cent of all current projects, ESSU said. …”

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/carillion-made-500m-in-revenue-from-pfi-projects-with-annual-returns-of-up-to-39-research-finds-a8180986.html

“Tories refuse to publish official report on doomed Carillion’s performance because it’s ‘commercially sensitive’ “

The Ministry of Justice has confirmed it commissioned an independent review into prison maintenance, millions of pounds of which was outsourced to the stricken giant, early last year.

The review was carried out after prisons minister Sam Gyimah said he was “not impressed” by Carillion’s maintenance work and the firm was sent a formal warning in September 2016. Despite the row, the firm went on to win another £40million in Ministry of Justice contracts last year – before collapsing leaving 20,000 jobs in the balance. Yet ministers say the report – together with other reports on Carillion’s effectiveness including an “improvement plan” – will not be handed to the independent House of Commons Library.

Justice minister Rory Stewart wrote: “There are no plans to place the information in the library as the report contains commercially sensitive information.”

Shadow Justice Secretary Richard Burgon said: “It’s outrageous that the govenrment is now refusing to publish this or any other reports that the Ministry of Justice has done into Carillion’s performance in our prisons.

“What has it got to hide?

“All too often with deals signed with private companies in our justice system, there is a lack of transparency and openness.

“This makes it incredibly difficult to hold the private sector to account and to ensure that companies are working in the public interest and not their own.”

A string of parliamentary questions by Mr Burgon revealed the Ministry of Justice spent £11.4million over three years on its 97-strong team of officials whose job it was to monitor contracts. But ministers admitted an “underestimation of the historical costs” meant some contracts did not achieve the savings they promised.

Mr Stewart said the independent report in early 2017 was “used to support several improvement initiatives.”

He added the department had meetings with Carillion at various levels “at least weekly” to discuss “specific issues”. He was unable to name the total number of meetings.

The minister told Mr Burgon: “A formal letter of concern was issued in 2016 to advise Carillion of performance failures.

“A performance action plan was put in place to address these failings and some improvements were made.”

It came as the government tonight said it has saved 1,000 Carillion prisons jobs by setting up its own facilities management firm. The staff in 52 jails who previously employed by the giant will move to the new company, Gov Facility Services Limited, with their terms and conditions preserved. Their work includes cleaning, maintenance and building repair.

Justice Secretary David Gauke said: “I want to reassure staff that their jobs are secure and essential to making prisons safer and more decent.”

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/tories-refuse-publish-official-report-11920351

Parliamentary committee heavily criticises regulatory system for move between public and private jobs

“The Government is failing to take the faults in the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments (ACoBA) seriously, the Public Administration and Constitutional Affairs Committee (PACAC) states in its fourth special report.

ACoBA remains part of an ineffectual system for regulating the ‘revolving door’ between the public and private sector and the Government appears not to take the matter seriously.

The Committee’s original report published in April last year stated that the regulatory system for scrutinising the post public employment of former Ministers and civil servants is ineffectual and does not inspire public confidence or respect. The situation had got worse since the Committee had last looked at the issue in 2012.

The Government has responded to each of the report’s recommendations but the Committee considers that they are inadequate given the seriousness of the issues raised in the report and their potential to undermine public confidence.

The Committee inquiry revealed numerous gaps in ACoBA’s monitoring process with insufficient attention paid to the principles that should govern business appointments. The failures of governments in this regard have damaged public trust in politics and public institutions and led to repeated scandals.

The Committee have decided to relaunch the inquiry at a future date.”

https://www.parliament.uk/business/committees/committees-a-z/commons-select/public-administration-and-constitutional-affairs-committee/news-parliament-2017/acoba-government-response-special-report-published-17-19/

DCC Councillor Claire Wright: “NHS REFUSES TO PROVIDE WINTER PRESSURES INFORMATION FOR DEVON COUNTY COUNCIL HEALTH SCRUTINY COUNCILLORS”

I am really disappointed to report that despite me asking at the beginning of January for the winter pressures information to be available at the 25 January Health and Adult Care Scrutiny meeting, it is not going to be provided.

Given the avalanche of very worrying “NHS in Crisis” press stories I sent several emails to committee chair, Sara Randall Johnson, at the beginning of January asking for information such as delayed discharges, A&E waits, levels of norovirus, staff vacancies and various other pieces of information.

I was told it would be published as part of the performance review. However, when the agenda papers were published last week, the performance review charts gave information until the end of November only.

I have since been told by the committee chair that a representative from the NEW Devon CCG claimed that they weren’t in a position to provide the information because it would give councillors an incomplete picture.
If this isn’t infuriating enough, winter pressures data is updated on a daily basis and circulated to NHS and social care managers. They have the information. And it’s as up to date as today.

The health scrutiny committee chair indicated during a phone call with me on Saturday that she thought this was acceptable and that this data not being provided until the March meeting was fine!

When I asked (as per the email below) for the data to be provided under ‘urgent items’ I was told the issue wasn’t urgent and there wasn’t time to get the paperwork out in any case.

The refusal to supply this information, is in my view, a deliberate obfuscation. An attempt to interfere with the democratic and legitimate process of scrutiny and the NHS should have been pressed to provide it for this meeting.

Here’s my email to chair, Sara Randall Johnson, sent last Wednesday (17 January):

Dear Sara

I am very disappointed that there will be no specific written report on winter pressures at next week’s meeting.

I think that most people, given that ongoing national crisis that the NHS is experiencing right now, would find it inconceivable that our committee did not have this important information to assess how our major hospitals are managing during winter.

I see that there is an agenda item for urgent items at the beginning of the meeting.

Can I ask that this information as I previously asked for, is included in the form of written reports from the four NHS acute trusts, as an urgent agenda item. This to include delayed discharges for the winter period and up until next week, A&E waits and numbers, staffing vacancies, levels of norovirus and all the other standard winter pressures reporting that the trusts do on a daily basis for their managers.

I look forward to hearing from you.
Best wishes
Claire”

“MPs finally get ‘revenge’ nine years after expenses scandal by blocking watchdog’s new job”

Owl wonders how many MPs are over 76 years of age. In 2016 there were 27 of them over 70 (the oldest being 84) and 107 between 60 and 65:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/12126186/More-female-MPs-and-over-70s-in-parliament-than-ever-before-report-finds.html

and how many take taxis from their London homes to the House of Commons!

“MPs have finally got “revenge” nine years after the expenses scandal – by blocking their watchdog’s new job.

The Commons voted 77-46 tonight to stop Sir Ian Kennedy, ex-chairman of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, becoming an Electoral Commissioner.

Sir Ian, who led a controversial crackdown on claims after the scandal in 2009, was backed by Theresa May for the £374-a-day role with the elections watchdog.

But 40 Tory and 31 Labour MPs were branded “petty” after leading a revolt against his appointment. HuffPost UK and The Sun quoted anonymous MPs describing the move as “revenge”.

Conservative former minister James Duddridge said he believed Sir Ian was “not a fit and proper person” to serve in the four-year role.

He told the Commons: “This gentleman is 76 now, he’ll be 80 at the end of his term. When he served on a health commission, he claimed £15,000 in taxis from North London to the job.

Whilst our expenses system desperately needed to be reformed, I don’t think there’s a single member of the House that thinks IPSA is a system that is a system lacking in bureaucracy that couldn’t be well reformed.

“I don’t think he did a good job.”

Labour MP John Spellar accused IPSA of “obstructionism”, adding: “Let’s be frank about it.

“Sir Ian Kennedy, many colleagues feel, largely created the dreadful, anti-elected member, vindictive attitude that has permeated so much of IPSA. That has basically taken as its premise that they are there to make life difficult for MPs.”

Commons Leader Andrea Leadsom said no objections were raised by the leaders of political parties to Sir Ian’s appointment.”

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/mps-finally-revenge-nine-years-11902828

“Key figures in Devon and Somerset devolution deal meet to thrash out a way forward”

Owl says: Translation of headline – “A few rich businesspeople with vested interests and a few power hungry but rather uninformed councillors with their eye on the future panic because they risk having their fingers extracted from lucrative pies and will make unsustainable promises if that’s what it takes to keep them in”.

And as for that “productivity strategy”:
https://eastdevonwatch.org/2017/12/04/dcc-corporate-infrastructure-and-regulatory-services-scrutiny-committee-savages-hotsw-growth-strategy/

“Moves to shift more power and cash to the Westcountry took an important step forward this week when key players met civil servants to thrash out the way forward. The Westcountry has been pushing to join former Chancellor George Osborne’s “devolution revolution”, which would take powers away from London and put it into the hands of local people.

The first meeting in Whitehall last week included discussions on transport infrastructure, broadband access, home building and support for business growth.

The bid for devolution is led by the Heart of the South West local enterprise partnership, which includes leaders from business and councils across Somerset and Devon, including Plymouth, Torbay and Exeter.

A delegation has now met representatives from the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy to discuss devolution proposals.

The group claims that additional decision making and budget powers could have huge benefits for the Westcountry, including higher productivity, better paid jobs, improved transport links and more affordable homes.

Devon and Somerset are lagging behind the rest of the country. By November 2016, 11 regions had already reached devolution agreements.

Heart of the South West submitted its first proposal in February 2016, but has yet to reach a concrete deal.

An earlier stumbling block, the election of a regional mayor, has already been removed by the Government.

The issue had threatened to split the partnership.

But now civil servants have agreed to hold regular meetings on the issue, according to the region’s leaders involved in the bid.

Plymouth Council leader Ian Bowyer said: “Creating a strong economy, which means jobs, stability and strong prospects for our young people as well as families is vital for the future of Plymouth and the region as a whole. We are already working together across so many areas to deliver growth.

“This was a really positive meeting and sets the scene for closer working that will benefit all our residents.”

A total of 23 partnership organisations from across the region, which also includes clinical commissioning groups and national parks, are involved in the plans.

A joint committee for the Heart of the South West economic region is now being set up to move the discussions forward.

Cllr David Fothergill, chair of the Heart of the South West shadow joint committee, said of last week’s meeting: “We explained our vision for the area and how to help it become more prosperous.

“We discussed skills, transport infrastructure, broadband access, ways to provide more homes where they are needed and support for businesses to grow, innovate and export more. We also talked about the specific challenges faced by rural communities.”

The group said its first meeting will be in March, where it will agree a productivity strategy.”

http://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/key-figures-devon-somerset-devolution-1106519

““CAMPAIGNERS REVEAL CASH-STRAPPED KENT NHS TRUST PAID MILLIONS TO A PRIVATE COMPANY TO FIND SAVINGS”

Dame Ruth Carnell is also leading Devon’s STP after her appointment os chief of the “Success Regime” on which her consultanct company worked prior to her appointment.

PRESS RELEAE:

“Two local Kent campaigners claim they had to mount a year-long investigation, involving numerous Freedom of Information (FOI) requests and a meeting with top NHS executives, in order to confirm that a small private consultancy firm had been paid over £6 million of local NHS funds to find cuts and “efficiency savings” in Kent.

Diane Langford and Julie Wassmer say they became concerned when they saw Dame Ruth Carnall, a former NHS executive who heads the private consultancy, Carnall Farrar, had been made Independent Chair of the Programme Board of the local Sustainability & Transformation Plan (STP) – one of 44 regional bodies put in place by NHS England to implement cuts and “savings” within the NHS.(1)

Author and campaigner, Julie Wassmer says “I raised concerns with former Canterbury MP, Julian Brazier, at a public (CHEK) meeting last March, questioning how Dame Ruth could possibly claim ‘independence’ when her own company was set to profit from the contract. At the same time, I was aware that my colleague, Diane Langford, had already been coming up against a wall of obfuscation in trying to discover how much that contract was worth and who was actually making the payments.”

Ms Langford, a writer and former Hansard transcriber says: “I actually submitted my first Freedom of Information request in December 2016, then dozens more to all eight Clinical Commissioning Groups (CCGs) in Kent and Medway as well as to Kent County Council (KCC) and NHS England in order to try to establish who was paying Carnall Farrar. As each respondent has up to 20 days to reply, it was an extremely time-consuming process and all the bodies denied having paid the firm though KCC had disclosed that the money came from ‘the NHS.’”

A complaint to the FOI Ombudsman against Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust was triggered when no reply was received within 20 days.

Eventually the campaigners found that millions of NHS money had been paid to Carnall Farrar by Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS Trust, of which Glenn Douglas was then CEO. Wassmer then obtained a meeting last month, at which the campaigners discussed with Douglas (now – CEO of the Kent and Medway Sustainability and Transformation Partnership) and Michael Ridgwell (its Programme Director) the huge sums that had been paid to Carnall Farrar and why they were not appearing on the Trust’s usual spending records for payments of £25k and over.

“Ironically,’ says Wassmer, “this was on 7th December, just before the local NHS was about to implode with the pressure of Christmas and New Year emergencies. Michael Ridgwell was unable to produce an exact figure of how much had been paid to Carnall Farrar, but suggested the sum of £2.2M. I then explained that with the help of research organisation, Spinwatch,(2) we had actually confirmed that a figure of £6,051,199 had been paid to September 2017 (3) – though only just over half of it had been logged in the Trust’s spending records, with no record of any significant spending on Carnall Farrar before June 2017 – and no trace of the remaining millions. At the meeting Glenn Douglas explained to us that as the STP is not an “organisation” it is not obliged to publish its payments, but Michael Ridgwell then agreed to publish the full expenditure on the Trust’s website and has since done so. These records show that Carnall Farrar has been paid well over half a million pounds a month since September last year, although it’s not known whether this money is on top of the £6m it has already charged the local NHS.“

The campaigners insist it is crucial to challenge the lack of clarity, transparency, and accountability surrounding such huge payments. Even more so as the government now seeks to introduce new bodies – Accountable Care Organisations – that could see billions of pounds of the NHS budget handed to commercial companies.

“This is public money,” says Wassmer, “NHS funds being diverted away from services and into the pockets of private consultancies. We know that over £6 million, and possibly more, has been paid from the local NHS budget to this one consultancy for barely 18 months’ work on the local STP. How much more is going to management consultants across the whole of the UK? It’s almost impossible to hold the system to account and I fear it will only be worse with the impending introduction of so-called Accountable Care Organisations (4). Paying millions to private companies, like Carnall Farrar to find damaging cuts within an underfunded service is not only senseless – it’s immoral.”

Diane Langford agrees: “This lack of transparency conceals not only the sums involved, but the role consultancies like Carnall Farrar play in axing services. At our meeting on 7th December, we mentioned that Dame Ruth Carnall had appeared in a 2011 list compiled by the Sunday Telegraph of the highest paid NHS “fat cats” – earning an annual salary of over £200,000 at that time.(5) Glenn Douglas was on the same list, and while he admitted he was still earning in excess of £200,000 a year, the point is that as an NHS member of staff he can be held duly accountable for his work, in a way that private companies like Carnall Farrar cannot.”

Dr Coral Jones, GP, vice -chair of Doctors in Unite and member of Keep our NHS Public commented: “As the campaigners Diane Langford and Julie Wassmer have uncovered, over £6 million has been paid to a single consultancy company run by a former director of NHS London to tell the Kent and Medway CCGs how to cut services. Downgrading of services at QEQM hospital in Margate, as proposed by Carnall Farrar, will put lives at risk. Patients in Thanet and all those in East Kent living miles away from Ashford will be at risk of death, or avoidable disability, after a review of Kent and Medway urgent stroke services plans to concentrate hospital treatment for strokes in three sites across Kent and Medway. There is no discussion of alternatives apart from the concentration of services in three hospitals, and none on how to avoid the poor outcomes for patients when treatment is delayed due to travel times. The use of management consultancy companies is widespread in the NHS. Their reports, costing many millions of pounds, all follow the same formula of cuts, re-configurations and concentration of services. On Saturday 27th January at 10.30 am there will be a community conference (6) at Queens Rd, Baptist Church, Broadstairs CT10 1NU to oppose downgrading of local NHS services and I urge everyone concerned about the NHS in Kent & Medway to come along.” ENDS

Source: http://www.spinwatch.org

“Crown representatives” are directors of other companies and Tory donors

“Labour has warned that the crown representatives who are supposed to police public sector suppliers such as the failed construction company Carillion face potential conflicts of interest, as its own research showed that several hold external directorships and one was a Tory donor.

A dossier produced by the party showed that the former admiral Sir Robert Walmsley, who is responsible to the taxpayer for monitoring the outsourcing multinational Serco, also sits on the board as senior independent director of two defence contractors, Ultra Electronics and Cohort plc.

Daniel Green, the crown representative for the energy sector, is a Conservative donor who has given £330,000 to the party and £15,000 to Theresa May’s successful leadership campaign in 2016. His profile on the LinkedIn network says he is the chief executive of a private equity firm, Liquid Business.

Jon Trickett, the shadow minister for the Cabinet Office, said such relationships amounted to “an astonishing conflict of interest and yet other example of the chumocracy”. Some of the crown representatives, he added “turn out to be people who actually work for companies that have contracts with the government”.

The crown representative system was introduced under the coalition in 2011. They are supposed to work across government on a part-time basis to act as a focal point for key companies or groups of companies who supply the public sector. When a company is in trouble, or deemed high risk, a crown representative is supposed to work with that company to develop an improvement plan.

The system has come into acute focus after Carillion’s liquidation. Julie Scattergood, the crown representative responsible for Carillion, retired last summer and was not replaced until autumn – by then the company had delivered profit warnings in July and September.

Sean Collins, the crown representative for Vodafone and the telecoms infrastructure provider Arqiva, is a non-executive director at JT Group, providing telecoms expertise in the Channel Islands. William Priest, the representative for technology services companies IBM and DXC, is a non-executive director at Connexin, a wireless broadband company.

Carillion collapsed a week ago leaving 28,000 staff facing uncertain futures as the government and private sector companies scrambled to take on its contracts. It had a £900m deficit in its pension fund at the time of collapse and it is unclear if employee pensions can be paid out in full.

The chief secretary to the Treasury, Liz Truss, said on Sunday that the government did not know how much the closure would cost the taxpayer. When Truss was asked on ITV’s Peston on Sunday if it would cost “hundreds of millions”, she said: “Well, it will be a significant amount of money, it’s been a serious issue.”

A government white paper designed to give regulators greater powers to block or place conditions on takeovers that are deemed to put pension schemes at risk is also being drawn up for publication in March.

The Cabinet Office did not respond to a request for comment.”

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2018/jan/21/conflict-of-interests-rampant-in-firms-such-as-carillion-warns-labour

Hunt asked to pause Accountable Care Organisations – but will he?

“Thank you for signing the petition STOP the new plans to dismantle our NHS, please share this!

https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/stop-the-plans-to-dismantle-our-nhs

Great news! Sarah Wollaston MP, Chair of the Health Committee has written to Jeremy Hunt asking him to “delay the introduction of the new contract for Accountable Care Organisations until after the Health Committee has taken the opportunity to hear evidence on the issues around the introduction of accountable care models to the NHS”

People are beginning to wake up to the possibility that the NHS is about to be privatised and are not happy about it. Has something worried Sarah Wollaston enough to take this step?

The Judge giving permission for the 999 Call for the NHS into the lawfulness of the Accountable Care Organisation contract to be heard and setting capped costs because of the importance and huge public interest, gave us all a sense of hope. Their case is due to be heard in Leeds in April and they are still crowdfunding for that.

The doctors and academic’s Judicial Review with regard to lack of public consultation and Parliamentary scrutiny which was joined by physicist Stephen Hawking created more publicity.

Now this news published today (Friday). We believe Accountable Care Organisations have huge implications for patients.

Let’s share the petition and make it huge. Together we can win this.”

https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/stop-the-plans-to-dismantle-our-nhs

More questions about two more failing privatised public services

EDUCATION:

“Parents are being “left in the dark” over who really runs schools in England, according to parliament’s education committee. It has called for the government to overhaul the oversight of academy chains after a string of high-profile failures.

Robert Halfon, the Conservative MP who chairs the committee, signalled to the the new education secretary, Damian Hinds, that the system of regulation had created overlaps and confusion, allowing some multi-academy trusts (Mats) to escape oversight.

“We are particularly concerned by the extent to which failing trusts are stripping assets from their schools. It is not clear to us that all schools are benefiting from joining Mats, or that trusts are providing value for money,” Halfon said in a letter to Lord Agnew, the academies minister.”

https://www.theguardian.com/education/2018/jan/17/mps-call-for-overhaul-in-oversight-of-england-academy-school-chains

PROBATION SERVICE:

“Private probation companies responsible for supervising more than 200,000 offenders in England and Wales face total losses of more than £100m, even after a £342m “bailout” by the Ministry of Justice, MPs have been told.

Ministry of Justice officials acknowledged on Wednesday that 14 of the 21 community rehabilitation companies were expected to make losses ranging from £2.3m to £43m by 2021-22, partly due to a sharp fall in the number of offenders being sentenced to community punishments.

Details of the state of the part-privatisation of the probation service – introduced by Chris Grayling when he was justice secretary in 2015 – were revealed during a Commons public accounts committee session. MoJ officials declined to comment on whether outsourcing was “an appropriate model” for probation services when pressed by Labour MPs, saying that it was a political question.”

https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/jan/17/private-probation-companies-face-huge-losses-despite-342m-bailout

“PEDIGREE CHUM”

Owl says: due diligence (lack of) and “chumocracy” – we know a LOT about that in East Devon!

“More than a week after Toby Young quit from the Office for Student Regulator, it has emerged that ministers turned down three other ‘appointable’ candidates in order to give the provocateur-journo his post. Labour MP Kevin Brennan, who got the facts in a Parliamentary answer, accuses ministers of ‘jiggery-pokery’.

Tory MP Robert Halfon said the appointment of Young “smacks of the elite” and was the “chumocracy at work”. There are concerns over the due diligence failures in the case and how more ‘suitable’ candidates were overlooked. It’s unclear when Young’s replacement will be chosen.”

Source: Huffington Post, “The Waugh Zone” online

Cranbrook Herald reports on estate rent charges

Owl broke this story on 2January:
https://eastdevonwatch.org/2018/01/02/cranbrook-residents-very-unhappy-about-estate-rent-charge-bills/

Now Cranbrook Herald has taken it up:

“The unexpected demand for payment caused uproar on social media, distressing many during the festive break.

One resident said the company which sent the letter was using ‘scare-mongering tactics’.

Another said the matter was a ‘disgrace’.

The estate and asset management company Blenheims sent the bill on behalf of the Cranbrook Consortium and FPCR (which provides the town’s landscape and horicultural services).

In the letter – delivered to all Cranbrook households on Friday, December 22 – Blenheims explained that the annual Estate Rent Charge (ERC), which meets the cost of maintaining the public open spaces and amenity areas had been reviewed.

Previously set at £150 per annum – based on an ‘historic and initial assessment of the annual costs’ – the Consortium had increased the ERC to £231.76, to reflect actual accounting figures. These suggested that the total costs of the 2017-18 ERC were £370,816. Split between 1,600 properties, this came to £231.76 per household.

In many cases, the £231.76 demand was reduced to £194.26, taking into account an initial quarterly ERC instalment paid by residents of £37.50.

The letter implied that the £194.26 needed to be paid in one sum. There was also confusion about when the money needed to be paid, with some residents believing it had to be within 10 working days.

There was no suggestion of being able to pay in instalments (although Blenheims has since said that there are three payment dates – January 22, February 1 and March 1).

Having received their bills, Cranbrook residents found Blenheims had shut for Christmas, and initially there was no one available to discuss the issue.

At the request of Cranbrook Town Council (CTC), the Reverend Lythan Nevard – Cranbrook’s minister and a Belonging to Cranbrook Facebook moderator – offered advice for residents, posting her thoughts on social media.

On January 2, CTC posted its own advice on its website, describing the timing of the letter as ‘unfortunate’, and Blenheims has since issued a ‘frequently asked questions’ (FAQ) document.

“I think the timing of the Blenheims’ letter was poor at best,” said a Cranbrook resident, who did not wish to be named. “Some people were concerned that if they just cancelled their direct debits, they would end up with bailiffs at their door after Christmas.”

“It was a disgrace to receive a letter demanding payment of £231.76 within ten days, and especially at this time of the year,” said another resident.

In its FAQ to residents, Blenheims said the payment demand was issued on December 22 in advance of the next collection date, December 25, and was ‘in accordance’ with residents’ ERC deed.

It also issued advice for those that had cancelled their direct debit or hadn’t returned their mandate and explained why the ERC was being increased and why residents – who are already paying council tax – were being charged for ERC.

Neither Blenheims nor the Consortium have provided the Herald with further comment on this matter.

CTC is currently finalising details of taking over the town’s ERC. If draft agreements are approved, from April 6, 2018, the ERC will be paid as part of EDDC’s council tax, with any increase in the element of the council tax payable to CTC.”

http://www.cranbrookherald.com/news/cranbrook-estate-rent-charge-1-5349929

Judicial review of Accountable Care Organisations allowed

“A judge has granted permission for national campaign group 999 Call for the NHS to bring a Judicial Review of NHS England’s draft Accountable Care Organisation contract.

The group believe this is not only unlawful under current NHS legislation, but would threaten patient safety standards and limit the range of available treatments. The case will be held in Leeds High Court on 24th April 2018.

‘999 Call for the NHS’ and internationally recognised public law firm Leigh Day are launching the third and final stage of their crowdfund on 12 January, in order to cover all the costs of bringing the Judicial Review, and are appealing for £12,000. This amount, when added to existing funds donated by hundreds of generous members of the public in 2017, will cover the £37,000 cost of the Judicial Review.



The link to crowdfund is: Crowd Justice Healthcare4All Stage 3 . Please give what you can – any amount is useful.

 The crowdfunding starts at 6pm this evening.

Recognising that it is in the public interest to establish if the Accountable Care Organisation contract is lawful or not, the Judge has awarded 999 Call for the NHS a capped costs order of £25K. This limits the costs that the campaign group would have to pay NHS England, were they to lose the case.



999 Call for the NHS – originally well known as the Darlo Mums who organised a 300 mile Jarrow to London People’s March for the NHS in 2014, culminating in a rally in Trafalgar Square attended by 20,000 people – are challenging NHS England’s introduction of a model contract for use by new local NHS and Social Care organisations, known as Accountable Care Organisations (ACO).

We can help https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/healthcare4all-stage3

Interestingly Dudley Clinical Commissioning Group “is in the process of trying to establish …perhaps the only example of an advanced ACO type model”, according to the Health Service Journal (HSJ), and had hoped to award the Accountable Care Organisation contract by April 2018. Now however, they have confirmed they are planning to award the contract after guidance by NHS England and NHS Improvement (the Regulator with Dido Harding as ‘Chair’) with a start date in April 2019.

Has the 999 Call for the NHS Judicial Review put a spanner in the works? We can only guess!

According to the HSJ, the Dudley Clinical Commissioning Group had planned that the contract would take forward the “multispeciality community provider” (MCP) new care model, (a form of Accountable Care Organisation). Worth £5bn, the contract would incorporate a capitated (per person) budget to cover much of the health and some social care for the population in the area. This is not the usual current form of payment for NHS treatments, which is based on the actual costs of treatments that are provided.

What happens if the Accountable Care Organisation budget for the population does not meet the costs of the treatments that patients need? Who gets treatment then?

Please help us fight the dismantling of the NHS, to save healthcare for all. https://www.crowdjustice.com/case/healthcare4all-stage3

Sign and share

https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/stop-the-plans-to-dismantle-our-nhs
Many thanks”

Source: 38 Degrees

Plymouth and Torbay to share some strategic planning functions – so where does LEP fit in?

So where does our Local Enterprise Partnership fit in with these emerging Strategic Planning areas of Plymouth/Torbay and Greater Exeter/East Devon/Mid Devon/Teignbridge Strategic Plan?

It’s all getting very confusing! Well, except that most of the LEP Devon and Somerset plans and money end up surprisingly close to Hinkley C!

“Plymouth and Torbay councils could share some planning services under plans to be discussed later in January.

Plymouth’s cabinet will discuss an “in principle agreement” looking at sharing some planning functions with Torbay Council on 16 January.

Torbay requested the partnership after a service review by Plymouth City Council last year made a number of recommendations.

Areas which could be covered under the arrangement include strategic and local planning, environmental policy, natural infrastructure and major developments.”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-england-devon-42543152

Another LEP, similar to our own, has serious questions to be answered

Owl has only just come across this article from August 2017, but how interesting!

“Controversial LEP Chairman combines top jobs for himself at Board, Executive and Sub-committee levels

The roles of Chair and Chief Executive have been combined and Mark Reeve is now the Executive Chairman of the LEP, the local body allocated £150 million of public money.

In addition it appears Mr Reeve is also still chair of the LEP’s sub-committee on investment and sub-committee on agri-tech – although the LEP website remains silent on this.

As such the boss of the local funding body awarded £150 million of taxpayer funds appears to be in charge at three different levels – Board, Executive and Sub-committee levels.

This unprecedented concentration of power in someone unelected by the public is despite Mr Reeve failing to explain why his own business annual accounts for his building firm Chalcroft, had financial irregularities in the same year he became boss of the LEP. Mr Reeve personally signed the accounts which record these financial irregularities.

The decision to extend Mr Reeve’s power was proposed by John Bridge – who coincidentally will also decide on Mr Reeve’s salary as the new Executive Chairman. Mr Bridge chairs the remuneration committee which will decide how much public money to give Mr Reeve.

Any constituent who wants more information on these arrangements should contact John Bridge direct at j.bridge@cambscci.co.uk”

http://stevebarclay.net/controversial-lep-chairman-combines-top-jobs-for-himself-at-board-executive-and-sub-committee-levels/

Update: he resigned the post in November 2017!

EDDC’s justification for Exmouth seafront “planning lite” application

Would you or I get away with this?

Exmouth Town Council arranging hurried meeting on 6 January 2018.

Let’s see what they think (Tory dominated, don’t build up you expectations!)

From EDDC to Town Councillors – how to justify the unjustifiable!

One for the Scrutiny Committee? Oh no, wait – not allowed to discuss individual planning applications! But maybe CAN investigate how there are double standards in planning – one for their own officers and one for everyone else.

No – even that’s not right! One for EDDC and its developers and one for the rest of us.

“Queen’s Drive Temporary Uses Planning Application Response to Concerns Raised by Exmouth Town Council

1. CONCERN ABOUT TOO LITTLE DETAIL IN THE APPLICATION.
The lack of detail in the planning application is a result of the tight timescale that we are faced with in delivering the temporary uses.
Time is a key driver for the delivery of the Temporary Uses project. We aim to have new facilities available by early spring 2018.
In order to achieve this, we have to secure a planning permission first, before starting work on the installation of the new facilities.
We also have to go through the research and then procurement process to find the suppliers (and operators where appropriate) for the new facilities.
We realised that if we are to achieve this tight timetable, we would need to undertake tasks concurrently. So we would need to submit a planning application without necessarily knowing the detail of exactly what the facilities would be and who would be supplying them.
We discussed this with our planning advisor and the Local Planning Authority and identified that we could submit a planning application that provided a general description of what we propose to do (and was therefore without too much detail), where (if approved at committee), the planning authority could put conditions on the permission and request the detail at a later time.
We agreed on a strategy for the planning application that would show the three zones for the three different “themes” of what will be on offer. Namely: children’s play, food and drink, and a range of one-off events.

2. CONCERNS ABOUT RESIDENTIAL AREA AND NOISE.
The District Council will have to apply for necessary licences to cover the hours of opening for the operation of the events on site. Again, as yet we do not know the detail of what the events will be as we are still in the research and planning stages. We would not expect that any event would be later than midnight. But note that this will only be on odd occasions – not every night. This application will be heard by the Licensing Committee in due course.

3. CONCERNS ABOUT THE FILLING IN OF THE PONDS.
We do not yet know the specific engineering solution for how the ponds will be filled in. It is thought that this will be loose material topped with sand. Whatever is used to fill the ponds could be removed in the future if required.
4. CONCERNS ABOUT THE TIMING OF SUBMISSION.
We are aiming for the application to be heard at DMC on 6 March 2018.
To meet this date and allow for the lead in period for the application to be processed, we therefore had to submit the application before Christmas (early December). It was not until early December that we had finalised the application ready for submission.

Alison Hayward
EDDC 3 January 2018”

“A THIRD of Tory donations come from a tiny group of rich men who enjoy lavish dinners with Theresa May”

Owl says: The Conservative Party – DEFINITELY for the FEW and not the MANY!

“More than a third of donations to the Tories last year came from a tiny group of super-rich men who enjoy lavish secretive dinners with Theresa May.

Research reveals how much Britain’s party of government depends on a band of millionaires for survival.

And it comes despite Mrs May vowing in 2007: “To restore public trust we must remove the dependency of the political parties on all large donors.”

Labour analysed donations by the 64 people – 62 of them men – who attended ‘Leader’s Group’ dinners, hosted by the Prime Minister and other senior ministers, in the first half of last year.

The Conservative Party trousered £12.9million from these donors or their firms in 2017, Labour’s research shows – 39% of all cash donations to the Tories across the year declared so far.

More than a third of the dinners’ attendees were on the Sunday Times Rich List, which brings together the 1,000 wealthiest people in Britain.

And almost half were from the world of finance including hedge fund bosses Sir Michael Hintze, a billionaire knighted under David Cameron who gave £345,000, and Andrew Law who gave £604,000.

Financiers at the dinners gave £4.5million between them – while £3.7million came from Brexit backers.

Ferrari-collecting JCB billionaire Lord Bamford and his family, the 35th-richest people in Britain and prominent donors to Vote Leave, topped the list by giving £2.5million to the Tories personally and through their firms in 2017.

Major donor diners also included Addison Lee cab firm founder John Griffin, housebuilding billionaire John Bloor, and spread-betting tycoon and former Tory co-Treasurer Peter Cruddas.

Other attendees were oil tycoon Ian Taylor who rejected a knighthood in David Cameron’s 2016 ‘crony honours’, and Arbuthnot private bank boss Sir Henry Angest and Tory chief executive Sir Mick Davis – both knighted under Mr Cameron a year earlier.

The only two women among the 64 diners gave £328,000 between them.

Socialite, philanthropist and friend of Bill Clinton Alisa Swidler gave £87,000 while Lubov Chernukhin, the banker wife of Russia’s former deputy finance minister, gave £241,000.

David Cameron denied Ms Chernukhin was a “Putin crony” in 2014 when it emerged she had paid £160,000 for a tennis match with the then-Prime Minister and Boris Johnson.

The Conservative Party website boasts tycoons can pay £50,000 to join the Leader’s Group and attend private dinners with Theresa May and ministers as part of efforts “to defeat the rise of socialism”.

Despite David Cameron promising to publish regular lists of attendees, those for the first half of 2017 were only released several months late after pressure from the Mirror.

We revealed Theresa May dined on lobster and beef with several donors at a secret London venue hours after confirming millions of people’s benefits would be frozen.

No minutes of the dinner meetings are ever published, and the Conservatives refuse to say what is discussed at them.

And the meals are limited to a tight circle of ministers, with only Mrs May, Boris Johnson, Philip Hammond and five other Cabinet ministers taking part in the first six months of 2017.

Shadow Cabinet Office minister Jon Trickett said: “The Prime Minister once said her party needed to remove its dependency on large donors and that she would not be driven by the interests of the rich and powerful.

“But after having to wait almost a year for the Tories to come clean about who is buying access to her and her senior ministers, we can see that couldn’t be further from the truth.

“As always with the Tories, the real decisions are made with a small group of wealthy backers.”

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/revealed-how-third-tory-donations-11798246